[brongondwana]

Of course not, the maintainers will accept a well thought out series of patches that each make one small logical change towards the better interface.

And yes - who else is supposed to fix all the regressions caused by changes that AMD wants? Volunteers who would rather work on something else? If you want a change, you get to support the regressions - and if AMD's work gets merged, then anyone ELSE who wants to make a change in that page needs to support AMD's regressions.

Hence wanting to make sure that the changes from AMD are manageable and flexible enough to allow further changes.

[wolfgke]

> If you want a change, you get to support the regressions

And what about a change to a stable internal kernel API, which the kernel developers refuse?

[pas]

No, they just want a stable future, around which they can plan the API, but so far no one has delivered on that tiny requirement.

[prodigal_erik]

Linux got where it is by evolving how the kernel and drivers interact whenever needed, without waiting to coordinate with outsiders and their closed work.

[the_why_of_y]

The Linux kernel does not have stable internal kernel APIs.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/stable_api_nonsense...

[wolfgke]

This is exactly my point.