[openib-general] [PATCH 0/10] [RFC] Support for SilverStorm Virtual Ethernet I/O controller (VEx)

[Fabian Tillier]

Yaron,

On 10/3/06, Yaron Haviv <yaronh at voltaire.com> wrote:
>
> The only point I'm making is that any one can add an overlay driver for
> his proprietary HW as he likes, and put it in OFED distribution, but if
> this is becoming an internal portion of the open fabric kernel than:
> 1. Let's look at how we solve the problems in a more general perspective
> 2. Let's not duplicate code where we can avoid it

How is this duplicating code?  It's just a NIC driver for a
proprietary NIC that uses IB as it's I/O bus.  What code is this
duplicating?

> 3. Let's make sure it's documented and reviewed (code and architectural
> wise)

There are many proprietary HW architecture drivers in the linux
kernel.  Heck, even in OpenFabrics -- the HCA drivers implement
prorietary protocols over the PCI bus.  Why should this be treated
differently?

The code should definitely be reviewed to make sure that it follows
the right network driver architecture, interfaces to the IB stack
properly, and follows the kernel coding guidelines.  In fact, the
review is what prompted this email thread.

> We have kept those standards for all other solutions; I think it's just
> as fair to demand it in that case as well

OpenFabrics has followed standards where they exist.  However, there
is nothing that restricts development in OpenFabrics to things that
have industry standards.  There is also nothing that restricts
proprietary drivers from having driver support in OpenFabrics or the
Linux kernel.  MTHCA is an example of a driver that does exactly this
- it is a driver to enable Mellanox's proprietary HCA architecture for
the OpenFabrics software stack with the goal of being merged into the
Linux kernel.

- Fab