Problems with kernel updates needing non-kernel changes

[Chuck Ebbert]

Jon Masters wrote:
> 
> Indeed. And options that are removed *must* be supported for a while. We
> can't have modules that loaded previously now failing just because the
> maintainer decided to remove a previously valid option without warning.
> This needs strong upstream coercion on the part of those taking patches.

We can always put the option back in the module just to make it load,
but I really don't want to be doing that all the time. Maybe I could
write patches that put the options back and just make them print a
warning saying the option is no longer valid, then send them upstream.
Maybe after a few iterations of that people will get the point?