On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 01:17:52PM -0800, Shannon Nelson wrote: > On 1/26/20 1:08 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > The long-standing policy in kernel that we don't really care about > > out-of-tree code. > > That doesn't mean we need to be aggressively against out-of-tree code. One > of the positive points about Linux and loadable modules has always been the > flexibility that allows and encourages innovation, and helps enable more > work and testing before a driver can become a fully-fledged part of the > kernel. This move actively discourages part of that flexibility and I think > it is breaking part of the usefulness of modules. You are mixing definitions, nothing stops those people to innovate and develop their code inside kernel and as standalone modules too. It just stops them to put useless driver version string inside ethtool. If they feel that their life can't be without something from 90s, they have venerable MODULE_VERSION() macro to print anything they want. Thanks > > sln >
