From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Hefty, Sean" Subject: RE: rdma-core 12 breaks libibverbs ABI Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 23:53:36 +0000 Message-ID: <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A82373AB0E15AD@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1485446147.4194.4.camel@profitbricks.com> <20170126171325.GA16562@obsidianresearch.com> <20170126173548.GA15006@infradead.org> <20170126180926.GB20330@obsidianresearch.com> <20170126181113.GA8679@infradead.org> <20170126202330.GX6005@mtr-leonro.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170126202330.GX6005-U/DQcQFIOTAAJjI8aNfphQ@public.gmane.org> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Leon Romanovsky , Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Benjamin Drung , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "Weiny, Ira" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org > > There should not be any compat - it's just going to drag down > > development and everyone is free to submit their provider to rdma- > core, > > same as kernel drivers. > > Agree, I have no desire to support out-of-tree providers. What is the plan for handling live updates to a single vendor library? Is the intent that vendors must now (potentially) provide different versions of their libraries, based on which libibverbs release is deployed by the user? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html