While I am delighted that the lower layers are suffficiently stable to warrant being considered for code review/inclusion in the kernel, I am slightly surprised.

Has the code been used in anger enough?

There seem to be a lot of bugs still being discovered daily.

Wouldn't having at least a preliminary set of user capabilities help assessment of the low level code and allow a wider set of people to evaluate it.

Are there sufficient test tools and documentation to allow an IB novice (kernel expert) to evaluate the offering.

Perhaps over the next month Doug could be a 'dry run guinea pig' for kernel inclusion and highlight the documentation and coding areas of difficulty prior to submission for a wider audience.

I am concerned that an overly changeable or buggy submission may do more harm than good.

Good luck with it though as I'm really looking forward to the fruits of this development.

Just an opinion

Paul


----- Original Message ----- From: "Roland Dreier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tom Duffy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <>
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: [openib-general] Upstream submission



   Tom> Is there a reason to break up into patches code in
   Tom> drivers/infiniband?

I think so: ease of review.  A single 15000 line patch is not going to
be very readable.  Breaking it up into multiple pieces makes the
architecture a little clearer and also helps naturally organize the
replies into multiple threads.

- R.
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general



_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

Reply via email to