[ewg] [RFC] – Proposal for new process for OFED releases

[Steve Wise]

On 12/05/2011 01:05 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>
> To be concrete/constructive here, a per IB stack module individual has to be assigned for that backporting, which 
> doesn't mean "make IB code from kernel X to build under kernel Y" - lets
> see if we have people to actually do that.
>
> For example, on the iser space, and for the stack provided by Mellanox to customers - I took the approach of 
> iser_backport(X,Y) = ~Y  --- which means that if I have to backport the iser code from kernel X into kernel Y, I 
> simply use the iser code that comes with Y
>
> I do that since Y has well/tight integrated iscsi stack for which the maintainers worked very hard to produce, and I 
> can't re-invent backporting that stack.
>
> The tilde in ~Y stands for slight verb changes that could arise from the backporting the rest of the IB stack has gone 
> through, from X to Y, so if the verb to create CQ has another param in X vs what it had in Y- I add it under the ~ 
> umbrella, is that clear?
>

What if you had some feature in kernel X's iser that you wanted in the kernel Y backport?  By your definition, this 
wouldn't be possible it seems.  If we're only using the functionality of kernel Y, then what's the point?   Maybe I'm 
confused.

Steve.