Am 30. April 2021 15:57:17 MESZ schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >Why not just have any new driver not use this name, as it is, it's not >hurting anything. I just want to make it clean for users/admins for what kind of device this module is for (vendor.ko is imho not good at least for vendors manufacturing such different devices). And avoid such conflicts like the phy (which had reintroduced the unclear module name). The new module will be renamed in next version..there is only discussion about the new name...and so i tried to fix the "other end". >Until you can guarantee that renaming this is not >going to break anything, I can not take it. If a user/administrator installs a new major kernel version he needs to check if all is still working. Then the new module can be loaded...i don't see a real breakage or much work for "fix" this,but it's ok if you do not take it up. This driver is afair available since 5.4 so i guess not much spreading in large productive environments mostly still using 4.14 or 4.4 I can repost with better description,but this is not needed if change itself will be rejected. So maybe anyone else can comment too. regards Frank
