Em 26-01-2011 17:16, Gerd Hoffmann escreveu: > Hi, > >>>> The check should be against concrete version (0x10000 in this case). Dmitry, Ok, now I see what you're meaning. Yeah, an absolute version check like what you've proposed is better than a relative version check. > > Stepping back: what does the version mean? > > 0x10000 == 1.0 ? > 0x10001 == 1.1 ? > > Can I expect the interface stay backward compatible if only the minor revision changes, i.e. makes it sense to accept 1.x? > > Will the major revision ever change? Does it make sense to check the version at all? Gerd, Dmitry will likely have a better answer for me, but I think you should just remove the test. By principle, the interface should always be backward compatible (if it isn't, then we have a regression to fix). You may expect newer features on newer versions, so I understand that the version check is there to just allow userspace to enable new code for newer evdev protocol revisions. Thanks, Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
