At Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:21:57 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 09:57:11AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > At Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:36 +0300, > > Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 07:57:29AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > > At Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:33:37 -0700, > > > > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > > > > > sound/soc/soc-dapm.c:1029: warning: 'snd_soc_dapm_connect_input' is deprecated (declared at sound/soc/soc-dapm.c:1026) > > > > > sound/soc/soc-dapm.c:1029: warning: 'snd_soc_dapm_connect_input' is deprecated (declared at sound/soc/soc-dapm.c:1026) > > > > > > > > These are definitions of deprecated interfaces. > > > > We can remove it in 2.6.29. If we don't want to be conservative, it > > > > can be removed in 2.6.28, too. > > > >... > > > > > > Since it's an in-kernel API there's no reason to keep it once there are > > > no users left. > > > > Right. But, IMO, now is no suitable time. > > A thing like API removal should have been tested in linux-next, and we > > had plenty of time indeed for 2.6.28. > >... > > A grep through the tree and one test compile that covers > sound/soc/soc-dapm.c should be enough testing. > > And having it then in -next once should be enough to discover if someone > wrongly added a new user. My point is the time for removal. The API changes should have been done in the merge window, and it should have been tested *before* the merge window. > I have removed many functions in the kernel, and there isn't much that > can go wrong - even adding a PCI ID to a driver has a bigger risk of > introducing a regression. Yeah, IMHO, adding PCI IDs blindly at the late stage should be avoided, too, although many people love that. thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
