On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 19:21:57 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

As this is an evolving mechanism, having the corresponding library in
the kernel similar to what we do with perf and other things makes a lot
of sense.  

If we did this everywhere we'd have hundreds of libraries in the
kernel tree and I would feel bad for all the distros that have to deal
with packaging such a thing :(

It is great for development but I'm not sure mono-repo directions are
so good for the overall ecosystem.

I have to agree here. When libtraceevent was in the kernel, it was a pain
to orchestrate releases with distros. When it was moved out of the kernel,
it made it much easier to manage.

The main issue was versioning numbers. I know the kernel versioning is
simply just "hey we added more stuff" and the numbers are meaningless.

But a library usually has a different cycle than the kernel. If it doesn't
have any changes from one kernel release to the next, the distros will make
a new version anyway, as each kernel release means a new library release.

This luoctl.c isn't even a library, as it has a "main()" and looks to me
like an application. So my question is, why is it in tools/lib?

-- Steve