[ewg] Sun is asking for a response on Bug No.s 1522, 1523

[Bill Boas]

Dear OFA Maintainers:

 

Sun has contacted me about these bugs and is asking for priority action to
get fixes for them. See the thread below.

 

I'm sending this email to 3 OFA lists because Sun having to contact the
Alliance this way raises many questions about how a vendor like Sun or a
customer like, say, a Wall St bank gets bugs fixed and where do we, the OFA,
publish this information?

 

And if we agree that an OFA maintainer is the right person to fix the bug
how does that maintainer learn that and how do they respond?

 

Thank you for responding to this email and to the Sun team using OFED in
their products.

 

Bill. 

 

Bill Boas

Executive Director and Vice Chair

OpenFabrics Alliance

510-375-8840

Bill.Boas at openfabrics.org

www.openfabrics.org

 

  _____  

From: Bryon.Neitzel at Sun.COM [mailto:Bryon.Neitzel at Sun.COM] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:20 PM
To: Bill Boas
Cc: Peter Jones; Brian J. Murrell; Makia Minich
Subject: Fwd: OFED 1.4 for NHM chips

 

Hi Bill,

I found the bug numbers for the Lustre build issues against OFED 1.4.0 that
I mentioned yesterday.

Is there any way to bump up the priority on these? This is blocking our
ability to deliver our new Vayu (Nehalem+QDR) hardware to our customers,
since Mellanox says they'll only support OFED 1.4 with QDR hardware.

 

Thanks,

Bryon

 

 

Begin forwarded message:





From: "Brian J. Murrell" <Brian.Murrell at Sun.COM>

Date: February 25, 2009 1:06:49 PM MST

To: Bryon Neitzel <Bryon.Neitzel at Sun.COM>

Cc: Peter Jones <Peter.A.Jones at Sun.COM>

Subject: Re: OFED 1.4 for NHM chips

 

On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 12:59 -0700, Bryon Neitzel wrote:



Hi Brian,   what is the website where these OFED bugs were filed?    


https://bugs.openfabrics.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1522
https://bugs.openfabrics.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1523




Bill Boas tried to find any OFED bugs opened by Sun yesterday,


Yeah.  I opened them a number of days ago.

Not sure if it matters to anyone, but IMHO, 1523 is the correct future
direction and fixing that would implicitly fix 1522.  1523 basically
describes separating the "technology preview" that caused this breakage
out into it's own independent module so that it does not pollute the
OFED core.  As such, it might be resisted as it's a "deeper cut" type of
fix, but one that removes the sick part rather than trying to continue
to bandage it.

b.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/ewg/attachments/20090226/6179208e/attachment.html>