[RFC] Raising the UBI version

Richard Weinberger richard at nod.at
Wed Jun 22 06:54:34 PDT 2016


Am 22.06.2016 um 14:43 schrieb Boris Brezillon:
> Why do we need to hardcode /sys/class/ubi/version to 1? We just need to
> update the mtd-utils to support version 2. Am I missing something?

We don't want to break existing userspace.
Why should ubimkvol or ubiattach fail on a system with SLC NAND and
CONFIG_MTD_UBI_CONSOLIDATE=y?

Especially since existing tools *will* work with CONFIG_MTD_UBI_CONSOLIDATE=y.
Rasing /sys/class/ubi/version and breaking existing tools is only acceptable
when we change all UBI ioctl() and sysfs files in a way such that version 1
userspace cannot work. Which is not the case here.

This is a nice example why version numbers is bad and feature flags should be used.
Currently UBI mixes the implementation version and the on-flash version.
We're changing only the on-flash version. The user visible ABI stays and will only
get extended.

Thanks,
//richard



More information about the linux-mtd mailing list