[I'm not sure why this is an OGB-Discuss discussion and not an ARC one...]
> Should be slam dunk to get the mfi putback. Without having seen any of the details of this project, there are two architectural level issues that jump out at me. One is that of an incompatible change, the other is knowing about a future train wreck. Issue 1: On SX, we currently have a mix of open and closed source components that includes a closed driver for this chipset. This project seeks to replace that driver with a different one, such that some new version of SX will behave differently. The issue is "what are those differences?" If they are along the lines of "something that works today will break tomorrow", then from a systems engineering perspective, we have a problem, and will need to take steps to address the disconnect. Issue 2: We know that the current state of the networking stack is not very friendly to driver changes (renames, multiple drivers for a single device, ...) - to the point where it is effectively impossible to mechanize/automate/releasenote all the steps needed to successfully remove one driver and replace it with a different one (yes, vanity names will help lots in this area, but they are not there yet). If we have reason to believe that we will have multiple drivers for the same network device, we know we will end up with a problem when they both end up in the same system. Because the system does not (yet) support this situation, we need to take steps to avoid it. What exactly those steps might be is beyond the scope of this email discussion and into the realm of ARC review. We all understand the conflicting desires that are in play, as well as the technical hurdles. Our job is to chart a course thru them all that gets us to the destination with the fewest casualties. -John
