From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:57315 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750821Ab0IMO2z (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2010 10:28:55 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 10:28:51 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Benny Halevy Cc: Trond Myklebust , Christoph Hellwig , Fred Isaman , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] RFC: pnfs: full mount/umount infrastructure Message-ID: <20100913142851.GA10170@infradead.org> References: <1283450419-5648-1-git-send-email-iisaman@netapp.com> <1283450419-5648-8-git-send-email-iisaman@netapp.com> <20100910235858.GB11231@infradead.org> <1284163679.14078.106.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <4C8E0A03.3020500@panasas.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <4C8E0A03.3020500@panasas.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 01:24:51PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote: > However, on the longer run I'd like us to consider formalizing > the kABI for non-GPLed layout drivers. No. Non-GPLed drivers will have a very hard way to stand against the derived work clauses for some specificly written new code anyway, and if you haven't noticed yet there's no kABI in mainline anyway. > I think that this is a great selling point as it fully materializes the > extensibility of the layout-type / layout-driver design model. Drinking again?