[openib-general] Re: OpenIb 1.0 release components

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

Quoting Moni Levy <monil at voltaire.com>:
> > > While this might be a good idea for modules such as iSER
> > > which are not currently part of the mainline kernel tree,
> > > it is in my opinion clearly not a good idea to replace the
> > > modules which *are* distributed with the mainline kernel.
> >
> > I agree, for the most part.
> >
> > What I have in mind for non-upstream kernel support is this:
> >
> >      * We have to ship out-of-tree drivers, simply because there's only
> >        one driver in the upstream kernel, and the others are not yet
> >        ready for submission.
> >      * Some kernel components are clearly not contenders for shipping.
> >        One example is kdapl, because it appears to be dead due to
> >        upstream veto.
> >      * Others might be reasonable, if they (a) see some testing and (b)
> >        don't intrusively patch the core kernel.  I'm thinking here
> >        about iSER and, to a lesser extent, SDP.
> 
> I would like to add another point also. It looks like that in this
> round of the major distribution releases they will just not be able to
> include the 1.0 release due to time constraints, so the only way to
> use 1.0 release (or newer) will be to replace them in the kernel.
> 
> Moni

I dont really understand this last point. What do you mean when you say
"replace them in kernel"? Replace what?

I understand it why you might want to add out of kernel modules such as iSER.
My point is they must work with core components included in kernel, not
with core out of the svn tree.

I gather Brian here agrees.

-- 
Michael S. Tsirkin
Staff Engineer, Mellanox Technologies