On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Jon Mason <jon.ma...@intel.com> wrote: > > I don't see the benefit of having the driver in staging. Any vendors > who would notice the ntb driver in staging would be sitting on these > mailing lists and hopefully have planety of comments on the design. > Stashing the driver in staging while waiting for these comments (which > may never come) doesn't seem the best course of action. >
I thought that since others are talking about it then may be there is some WIP code for foo-NTB. Seems like that's not the case. So no need to stage. Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't apps just open a socket and route data via ntb_vir_eth_dev? So I don't see an ABI breakage issue and hence nothing would prevent us from changing the kernel parts(for accommodating some foo-NTB part) in future. It may not be a bad idea to prefix intel-specific(if any) ntb_structs/variables/logic with the 'intc'(Intel ticker or pick your string) keyword. Chetan Loke -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
