Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/29] arm64: dts: qcom: Harmonize DWC USB3 DT nodes name

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:17:30 +0200

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 12:54:51AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> I always thought that ABI is supposed to be something what is
> thoroughly documented and firmly declared to be so. It isn't something
> claimed to be on a random nature but defined to be one when it's
> more-or-less standardized. Thus the Linux kernel developers decide not
> to change something unless it went through the series of iterations like
> testing, stable, obsolete, remove. As I see it the rule-of-thumb is
> supposed to be as "nothing is ABI unless it's declared as such".

Not true at all.  Again, if something works in an older kernel version,
and you upgrade to a new kernel version and it breaks, that is a
regression and must be fixed/reverted.

Lack of documentation does not mean an ABI can be changed.

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel