News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ask HN: Why no stable binary kernel interface for drivers? by 708145_ on Sunday June 11, 2017 @04:37PM (#14533665)
> As http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1604.0/03993.html states, you can get binary stability for in the order of five years from the likes of Red Hat and SuSe.

Yes but why can't the kernel provide a stable interface? The stable_api_nonsense.txt is just nonsense for me.

Re:Ask HN: Why no stable binary kernel interface for drivers? by avar on Sunday June 11, 2017 @05:35PM (#14533912)
Because the kernel developers aren't interested in assuming the maintenance burden of maintaining (possibly many incompatible and versioned) interfaces purely for the benefit of users who maintain out of tree drivers.
Re:Ask HN: Why no stable binary kernel interface for drivers? by mixmastamyk on Sunday June 11, 2017 @05:51PM (#14533995)
I'm surprised driver interfaces are still changing so frequently. Ten years ago perhaps, but they're not largely sorted today twenty five years+ after Linux debut?
Re:Ask HN: Why no stable binary kernel interface for drivers? by planteen on Sunday June 11, 2017 @11:14PM (#14535027)
There have been general architecture changes. Look at DRM as a better way to do rendering versus the old Unix way, for example.
Re:Ask HN: Why no stable binary kernel interface for drivers? by mixmastamyk on Monday June 12, 2017 @02:24PM (#14539615)
Sure, but isn't that ten years old already? It's not like these big changes come every month.
Re:Ask HN: Why no stable binary kernel interface for drivers? by DonbunEf7 on Sunday June 11, 2017 @05:34PM (#14533911)
Not "can't," but "won't." It's not considered worth the effort; the technical benefits are too great when doing it the current way. The political side effects are a great bonus but not the main motive.