On 07.03.22 10:58, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 8:13 AM Thorsten Leemhuis > <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 16.02.22 15:40, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:56 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 12:24 AM Marcelo Roberto Jimenez >>>> <marcelo.jimenez@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 1:55 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> I am curious about the usecases and how deeply you have built >>>>>> yourselves into this. >>>>> >>>>> I don't know if I understand what you mean, sorry. >>>> >>>> Why does the user need the sysfs ABI? What is it used for? >>>> >>>> I.e what is the actual use case? >>>> >>>>>>> In any case, the upstream file should be enough to test the issue reported here. >>>>>> >>>>>> The thing is that upstream isn't super happy that you have been >>>>>> making yourselves dependent on features that we are actively >>>>>> discouraging and then demanding that we support these features. >>>>> >>>>> Hum, demanding seems to be a strong word for what I am doing here. >>>>> >>>>> Deprecated should not mean broken. My point is: the API seems to be >>>>> currently broken. User space apps got broken, that's a fact. I even >>>>> took the time to bisect the kernel and show you which commit broke it. >>>>> So, no, I am not demanding. More like reporting and providing a >>>>> temporary solution to those with a similar problem. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe it is time to remove the API, but this is up to "upstream". >>>>> Leaving the API broken seems pointless and unproductive. >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for the "not super happiness of upstream", but maybe upstream >>>>> got me wrong. >>>>> >>>>> We are not "making ourselves dependent on features ...". The API was >>>>> there. We used it. Now it is deprecated, ok, we should move on. I got >>>>> the message. >>>> >>>> Ouch I deserved some slamming for this. >>>> >>>> I'm sorry if I came across as harsh :( >>>> >>>> I just don't know how to properly push for this. >>>> >>>> I have even pushed the option of the deprecated sysfs ABI >>>> behind the CONFIG_EXPERT option, which should mean that >>>> the kernel config has been made by someone who has checked >>>> the option "yes I am an expert I know what I am doing" >>>> yet failed to observe that this ABI is obsoleted since 5 years >>>> and hence failed to be an expert. >>>> >>>> Of course the ABI (not API really) needs to be fixed if we can find the >>>> problem. It's frustrating that fixing it seems to fix broken other >>>> features which are not deprecated, hence the annoyance on my >>>> part. >>>> >>> >>> I'm afraid we'll earn ourselves a good old LinusRant if we keep >>> pushing the character device as a solution to the problem here. >>> Marcelo is right after all: he used an existing user interface, the >>> interface broke, it must be fixed. >>> >>> I would prefer to find a solution that fixes Marcelo's issue while >>> keeping the offending patches in tree but it seems like the issue is >>> more complicated and will require some rework of the sysfs interface. >>> >>> In which case unless there are objections I lean towards reverting the >>> relevant commits. >> >> Sounds good to me, but that was two weeks ago and afaics nothing >> happened since then. Or did the discussion continue somewhere else? > > Now queued for fixes, thanks for the reminder. thx, and yw, that's what I'm here for ;-) Sadly that commit didn't use 'Link:' tags pointing to the report (the start of this thread) using lore.kernel.org/r/, as explained in 'Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst' and 'Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst'. I'd say that would have been really wise here if someone sooner or later needs to look into the backstory of the fix. And is also means that I have to tell my regression tracking bot about this issue manually now. :-/ #regzbot fixed-by: 86528d306d1826cfe59481001d63761ba793317a But whatever, thx for taking care of this! Have a nice week everyone! Ciao, Thorsten >>>>> And I will also tell the dev team that they must use the GPIO char dev >>>>> and libgpiod from now on and must port everything to it. And we will >>>>> likely have another group of people who are not super happy, but >>>>> that's life... :) >>>> >>>> I'm happy to hear this! >> >> Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat) >> >> P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I'm getting a lot of >> reports on my table. I can only look briefly into most of them and lack >> knowledge about most of the areas they concern. I thus unfortunately >> will sometimes get things wrong or miss something important. I hope >> that's not the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to tell me >> in a public reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record >> straight. >> >> #regzbot poke >