>> So do you mean that the TILE-Gx maintainers officially give up on their role? >> Then please update the MAINTAINERS file.
Yes. Please update the MAINTAINERS file as needed. Chris Metcalf is out this week. I could submit a separate patch for the MAINTAINERS file if it's required. Or we could wait a little bit until Chris comes back. Thanks, Liming -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monja...@6wind.com] Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2017 4:30 AM To: Chris Metcalf Cc: Vincent JARDIN; Bruce Richardson; Jerin Jacob; Olivier Matz; Liming Sun; Olga Shern; Yael Shenhav; dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] catch up TILE-Gx support in DPDK 2017-02-17 20:52, Chris Metcalf: > This patch series allows DPDK to build for TILE-Gx as of version 17.02. > > A required library (libgxio) had not been made publicly available. > It is now available as source here: > > > http://www.mellanox.com/repository/solutions/tile-scm/libgxio-1.0.tar. > xz > > it has also been folded into the binary release of the generic > toolchain that we periodically update on that website; for more > information about the toolchain tarballs, see here: > > http://www.mellanox.com/repository/solutions/tile-scm/ > > Note that the toolchain components were updated slightly in this > release of the tarballs relative to what was there before. Thank you. Some of these changes (being able to compile on a free toolchain) should have been done since the beginning. Better later than never :) I think we won't allow any new component in DPDK which cannot be built freely, in the future (lessons learned). > Hopefully, with DPDK now working on TILE-Gx again, there may be > interest from someone in the community in taking on a maintenance > role. At this point, the Mellanox engineering team responsible for > TILE-Gx is largely focused on working on future chips based on ARMv8, > so unfortunately we won't have much bandwidth for TILE-Gx support going > forward. So do you mean that the TILE-Gx maintainers officially give up on their role? Then please update the MAINTAINERS file. > If it still seems like removal makes sense now or at some point in the > future, it would probably at least be good to apply these patches so > there is a baseline to pick it up from later. I agree. We can apply these patches before removing the whole architecture. > Liming Sun, the tile dpdk maintainer, has reviewed these changes (he > sits next to me); if it's more appropriate, he can resend these > changes with his Signed-off-by as well. I took on this work since I > was more familiar with libgxio and the details of our toolchain (I am > the maintainer for the tile architecture for Linux and glibc). I think it is OK as is.
