Hello Sergey,

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 01:56:12PM +0300, Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> On 1/18/22 12:18 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 03:19:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 07:36:43PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> >>> A possible compromise: We can have both. We rename
> >>> platform_get_irq_optional() to platform_get_irq_silent() (or
> >>> platform_get_irq_silently() if this is preferred) and once all users are
> >>> are changed (which can be done mechanically), we reintroduce a
> >>> platform_get_irq_optional() with Sergey's suggested semantic (i.e.
> >>> return 0 on not-found, no error message printking).
> >>
> >> Please do not do that as anyone trying to forward-port an old driver
> >> will miss the abi change of functionality and get confused.  Make
> >> build-breaking changes, if the way a function currently works is
> >> changed in order to give people a chance.
> > 
> > Fine for me. I assume this is a Nack for Sergey's patch?
> 
>    Which patch do you mean? I'm starting to get really muddled... :-(

I'm talking about "[PATCH 1/2] platform: make
platform_get_irq_optional() optional" because "trying to forward-port an
old driver will miss the abi" applies to it.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |