On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:35:39 -0800 "Woodruff, Robert J" <robert.j.woodr...@intel.com> wrote:
> Doug wrote, > > >I'm not so much concerned over IBTA standards. I'm concerned over what > >makes it into the upstream linux kernels. How much OFED's kernel > >differs from the upstream kernel directly impacts supportability of the > >OFED stack in our products. The more it diverges, the higher the > >support load. We actively control that divergence as a result. > > In general, we discussed and decided at the last developer's workshop > in Sonoma to try to make sure that any new features that were going > into OFED be first accepted for inclusion in the upstream kernel, or > at least queued in Roland's tree for upstream. > I think we did a pretty good job in OFED 1.4 of adhering to that > process, or at least we made significant progress towards that goal. > > We did this specifically to try to prevent major divergence between the > upstream kernel and the OFED kernel. So for a major new feature like > IBoE, I think it makes sense to first discuss the patches on ofa-general > and perhaps even a RFC on kernel.org before we include it into an OFED > release. > > my 2 cents, > > woody I agree. OFED should be downstream of kernel.org for as much as possible. New features should be introduced there first. Ira _______________________________________________ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg