From nobody Thu Jun 05 17:01:04 2025 X-Original-To: current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4bCrLm6v7Mz5y5xM; Thu, 05 Jun 2025 17:01:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@freebsd.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R11" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4bCrLm4nZfz3Swl; Thu, 05 Jun 2025 17:01:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@freebsd.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1749142864; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2Q7vAihSiZAbK4xfcG6f9zVNpq45gqA7tW7zcRqZ3cw=; b=P55chR6sWhvs8/iuWlYjJ4M770tIP69/QnK4sPEVJMF1DERWNRGz8OFQOgrITwgSwlxKGE A9UGT9LKeQyGR3uBJgHsdblSZy4Gu/Gf/lfxss9K8abRZH5pg9AfOJTQVxreApEuhNxpBL ietPpu6zzVHpMgjjoz1sRmRc3UAjCo9z6wdiEBuKT3BwO8yF1q5W8kXQDk5JJMt09yW7w4 C5/F9XdxyFfEjh1s10blEq/uomKwv4/mfzfT8rQn9l2i9q1QLdmJEcsXrWI0cozad9jWx9 F8Apki/obXjuTF3RDaQ6oFzwi6Et4i0JTbu/MSpuseJ89aw6RX05dHivM/EE1g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1749142864; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2Q7vAihSiZAbK4xfcG6f9zVNpq45gqA7tW7zcRqZ3cw=; b=ichLXAP6R41+FzsCaKo8c/G9DO+AR0xSu7J+LKtgjY3lsN94h0XS7LS6+fjcagN1SPE4sY qoRRYvWOEF7tL0TLgHsKW8NHiYZDonnyPqZFTnv0Olit2bKfuAHheoLdMBWwzORK67hgzb SmRxA++urZAuR537KHBbJP9DCz1E9YaOiRBNt3lq00Re5SWbUaXZyXeRXnEipKQCCLro+z iZe4PZP9StGgQThHyT77zG5IF3/4jCTt0O1nrSlHwJo8ZsZwuaMoSJwWRv/5ANV4yH3SiU Z5nhJAqk5d3DGZmoUEirdrQmt/IKZf094Q3hXXZhQeSDSYpX0zEU+OPp0E9WKw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1749142864; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=klReW2DAoZxPhjCW+CGnwbVADSTVuKwmueohhW8sWkS3T3KORM8J6MWSf2Qasyoj6LoHsk CG2R+7m9okkmnAMKlaZpD7KtQwb5S792RvcMKRdNuQcQhmWYdcHCygqpbET1hvSYkDJCZa nHmC/TM4Corn0olkIrSsaSufiZpantEk9ub+LoRuExR7N5EHE1sOUW5EbhzzdsCvoQQkxX 2mI7ThbF3H2eg2qTDa5xEEy0sdEIIpilnsv7gw87MmrygzPz4m5k0yvqYVGH+MOJ5qgl9I s+KNDGt3BFJqeeeXQJZGCDuUdE5ze26RAG0hfMIw04CBKDuSEwCXbw3iVwM62A== Received: from spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (spindle.one-eyed-alien.net [199.48.129.229]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: brooks/mail) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4bCrLm4CVGz194g; Thu, 05 Jun 2025 17:01:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@freebsd.org) Received: by spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (Postfix, from userid 3001) id 4C9053C01A0; Thu, 05 Jun 2025 17:01:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 17:01:04 +0000 From: Brooks Davis To: Warner Losh Cc: David Chisnall , "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , wireless@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current , FreeBSD Stable ML , desktop@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: wireless KPI and KBI and FreeBSD 15 Message-ID: References: <114q5890-nrs9-55r5-44n9-86506985490s@SerrOFQ.bet> <6803DF9A-5660-4F05-82CC-B4085584EF30@freebsd.org> <81E0167A-7330-4C67-BEAA-074A7CA26E63@FreeBSD.org> List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 09:40:27AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > Bringing it back to wifi: we're so far behind the curve on WiFi today > that we shouldn't saddle it with stability prematurely. We should do > things like kv pairs to make it better. We should try not to shoot > ourselves in the foot. But mistakes will be made almost certainly > despite due care, and I'd rather give the wifi folks a > get-out-jail-free card on a temporary basis to allow them to catch up > because doing backwards compat stuff isn't super hard, but can be > super time-consuming especially when there's no tests to assure > accidents don't happen and tracking down why something crashed for > binary compat reasons can take a huge amount of time. At least when I > did this stuff for a release or two for drm-kmod when we did try hard > to stay compatible for several minor releases. It was a ton of work. I > don't think we currently have the resources to commit to that work > because it will come at the expense of new features. I think this is the best compromise. I do think we might want to consider batching of wifi MFCs so most breaks occur infrequently (perhaps around release time) rather than scattered through out the inter-release period. My thinking here is that we shouldn't be breaking things for stable users more often than necessarily and for the brave it wouldn't be that big a deal to pull from a rebased MFC candidate branch. This wouldn't be free, but maybe it's got a reasonable cost/benefit ratio. -- Brooks