[ofa-general] Re: [ewg] RE: OFED Jan 5, 2009 meeting minutes on OFED plans
Ira Weiny
weiny2 at llnl.gov
Wed Jan 7 10:15:45 PST 2009
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:35:39 -0800
"Woodruff, Robert J" <robert.j.woodruff at intel.com> wrote:
> Doug wrote,
>
> >I'm not so much concerned over IBTA standards. I'm concerned over what
> >makes it into the upstream linux kernels. How much OFED's kernel
> >differs from the upstream kernel directly impacts supportability of the
> >OFED stack in our products. The more it diverges, the higher the
> >support load. We actively control that divergence as a result.
>
> In general, we discussed and decided at the last developer's workshop
> in Sonoma to try to make sure that any new features that were going
> into OFED be first accepted for inclusion in the upstream kernel, or
> at least queued in Roland's tree for upstream.
> I think we did a pretty good job in OFED 1.4 of adhering to that
> process, or at least we made significant progress towards that goal.
>
> We did this specifically to try to prevent major divergence between the
> upstream kernel and the OFED kernel. So for a major new feature like
> IBoE, I think it makes sense to first discuss the patches on ofa-general
> and perhaps even a RFC on kernel.org before we include it into an OFED
> release.
>
> my 2 cents,
>
> woody
I agree. OFED should be downstream of kernel.org for as much as possible. New
features should be introduced there first.
Ira
More information about the general
mailing list