On Fri, 6 Sep 2013 17:28:09 +0000 "Williams, Mitch A" <mitch.a.willi...@intel.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On > > Behalf Of Joe Perches > > Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 11:47 PM > > To: Brandeburg, Jesse > > Cc: Stephen Hemminger; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; da...@davemloft.net; e1000- > > de...@lists.sourceforge.net; net...@vger.kernel.org; go...@redhat.com; > > sassm...@redhat.com > > Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] [net-next v5 8/8] i40e: include i40e in kernel > > proper > > > > On Fri, 2013-09-06 at 06:28 +0000, Brandeburg, Jesse wrote: > > > On Sep 5, 2013, at 11:15 PM, "Stephen Hemminger" > > <step...@networkplumber.org<mailto:step...@networkplumber.org>> wrote: > > > > > > Dumb question why is this named Kbuild instead of Makefile like almost > > > every other network driver? > > > > > > All the new kids are doing it, we'll at least that is what I thought when > > I made it. > > > > > > Re-reading https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt > > > > > > I see that Makefile is preferred but Kbuild overrides Makefile. > > > > > > Either way works, but I would prefer not to rename it at this point but > > would gladly do so in a follow up patch > > > > Please do. > > > > I suppose it makes _some_ sense to use Kbuild in the > > include paths but I think Makefile in places where > > compilations are done is better. > > > > That was me. I did it to make things less confusing for our customers and for > us as engineers. > > My goal was to make our out-of-tree driver as close as possible - including > the makefiles - to the upstream driver. Doing this makes it simpler for us to > backport and forward-port patches. It makes it less confusing for us when > we're moving from one environment to the other. > > The Kbuild file submitted here is exactly the same file that will be included > in our out-of-tree tarball. To avoid confusion, I named it Kbuild, so nobody > would just run make in the source directory. The toplevel makefile in our > tarball is named Makefile, and I wanted that to be the only Makefile around > so nobody would be confused (including me). > > The kernel documentation specifically states that this is acceptable > (Documentation/kbuild/modules.txt). Furthermore, > Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt states that using Kbuild as a filename is > acceptable. > > Personally, I'd prefer to keep these named Kbuild. Doing so makes it simpler > to keep our in-tree and out-of-tree drivers in sync. But if you're really > passionate about having them named Makefile, we can deal with it. It's just > one more detail for us to keep track of (and potentially screw up). > > If there is a hard requirement that these files be named Makefile, then I > would request that the kernel documentation be updated to reflect this. > > -Mitch First, upstream kernel does not care how or why you do something for out-of-tree driver. As far as network developers are concerned, it is your own process (mistake) and you can live with the consequences of that decision. Second, why introduce something different to upstream with no apparent benefit $ find drivers/net -name Kbuild | wc -l 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more! Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58041391&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
