On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 08:50:24PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 05:41:51PM +0000, Kalderon, Michal wrote: > > > From: Jason Gunthorpe [mailto:jgg@xxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 12:18 AM > > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/qedr/main.c > > > > b/drivers/infiniband/hw/qedr/main.c > > > > index db4bf97..7dbbe6d 100644 > > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/qedr/main.c > > > > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ > > > > MODULE_DESCRIPTION("QLogic 40G/100G ROCE Driver"); > > > > MODULE_AUTHOR("QLogic Corporation"); MODULE_LICENSE("Dual > > > BSD/GPL"); > > > > +MODULE_VERSION(QEDR_MODULE_VERSION); > > > > > > > > #define QEDR_WQ_MULTIPLIER_DFT (3) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/qedr/qedr.h > > > > b/drivers/infiniband/hw/qedr/qedr.h > > > > index 86d4511..ab0d411 100644 > > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/qedr/qedr.h > > > > @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ > > > > #include "qedr_hsi_rdma.h" > > > > > > > > #define QEDR_NODE_DESC "QLogic 579xx RoCE HCA" > > > > +#define QEDR_MODULE_VERSION "8.33.11.20" > > > > + > > > > > > I thought we had a general prohibition against versions like > > > this in mainline drivers? And what does this hunk have to do > > > with supporting new firmware? > > > > > I'm assuming you refer only to rdma in regards to version > > prohibition right ? as looking at all other vendors (including > > Mellanox) all have module versions under net/ why is rdma > > different in this way ? I now searched back mails on the topic > > and found an email from Leon where he stated: " I am strongly > > against module versions. You should rely on official kernel > > version." But it's not always the inbox driver that is installed > > or probed, the kernel version is not enough. Given different > > distros, vanilla kernels, out of box drivers, etc... it is > > essential for us that based on logs And modinfo we can determine > > the qed* drivers that are running. > > We actually stopped to maintain driver versions, just ensure that inbox, > upstream and MLNX_OFED have different names. > > The discussion thread is here > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/2017-June/004426.html > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/2017-June/004441.html Hmm, Linus pretty clearly said No to MODULE_VERSION and related. So I can't take this hunk, and you shouldn't do in ethernet either, I guess. Honestly the idea that this version will somehow have meaning in the distro kernels is pretty far fetched. You think distros will backport patches changing version # in any way that will make some kind of sense? Jason
