|From:||"Leonid Grossman" <leonid.grossman-AT-neterion.com>|
|Subject:||RE: [ANNOUNCE] Experimental Driver for Neterion/S2io 10GbE Adapters|
|Date:||Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:07:54 -0800|
|Cc:||<netdev-AT-oss.sgi.com>, <leonid-AT-neterion.com>, <jgarzik-AT-pobox.com>, "'Andi Kleen'" <ak-AT-muc.de>|
> Alex Aizman writes: > However, the main question remains: will the > HAL-based driver (because even after the script-produced "surgery" it'll > continue to be HAL based) ever get accepted? Hi all, We truly appreciate the time spent on looking at the code and the feedback.. I guess Alex is asking the right question - before we start code changes, it will be great to get a rough consensus on whether this HAL-based driver (after suggested changes) will be acceptable to the community - or yet another HAL driver in tree will be still "one too many"? In particular - after this discussion, does David's statement below still stand (not sure there was an unconditional rejection of the HAL model from someone else)? >David Miller writes: >I totally reject this driver, HAL is unacceptable for in-tree drivers. >We've been over this a thousand times. If this stands, we are prepared to recall the submission and keep the current "Linux and everything else" status-quo for 10GbE Xframe drivers. It's not the best maintenance option (both for us and arguably, even for a non-primary-author kernel hackers) but it's workable. Thanks again, Leonid
Copyright © 2005, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds