[Fwd: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] Add access into build (Roland's branch)]

[Hal Rosenstock]

Just one further thought on this. At the 9/9 OpenIB SWG Face to Face
meeting, the following was discussed and agreed:

Once there is a working MAD layer, there will be a new official gen2
branch with just phase 1 deliverables.
Then stable and development branches. Development would add in CM, etc.

Does this mean roland_branch is intended to be this branch ?

-- Hal

-----Forwarded Message-----
From: Hal Rosenstock <halr at voltaire.com>
To: Roland Dreier <roland at topspin.com>
Cc: openib-general at openib.org
Subject: Re: [openib-general] [PATCH] Add access into build (Roland's	branch)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 23:13:40 -0400

On Tue, 2004-09-28 at 21:59, Roland Dreier wrote:
>     -obj-$(CONFIG_INFINIBAND) += legacy/ core/ ulp/ hw/
>     +obj-$(CONFIG_INFINIBAND) += legacy/ core/ access/ ulp/ hw/
> 
> This doesn't really make sense to me.  Why do we need a core/ and an
> access/ directory?  I prefer core/, since it matches drivers/usb/core,
> net/core and sound/core already in the kernel tree, and "access layer"
> is a bit of jargon that no one not familiar with the history of IB
> stacks is going to understand.  However if we prefer access/ then I'll
> move everything from core/ there.

I guess this is temporary too. I don't really care if it is core or
access. I just chose access at the time as it was unclear how things
would evolve. I'm OK with moving ib_mad (and ib_smi) into core when the
time is right.

-- Hal

_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
openib-general at openib.org
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general