RE: [ewg] Re: [ofa-general] OFED Jan 28 meeting summary onRC3readiness

2008-01-31 Thread Sean Hefty
In all fairness, the kernel portion of all of this, and the process of
getting things into Linus' kernel, has *always* been a case of staging
things in Roland's tree and then merging upstream.  So, at least for the
kernel, that's mostly true as OFED is pretty close to Roland's tree
generally speaking.  As for the user space packages though, you guys
*are* the upstream.  There's no one to merge upstream to and very little
oversight by anyone.  So, it's entirely up to all of you just how much
your package seems to be a feature of the day change-athon versus a
solid, stable program.

I don't believe that this is the model actually in use.  OFED has accepted
kernel features that have not been submitted for upstream inclusion, or, in some
cases, that were, but were rejected.  (For examples, see local SA, SA event
subscription, XRC, SDP, and some of the previous incarnations of IPoIB CM.)
There are thousands of lines of code difference between OFED and the kernel upon
which it's based.  (To be clear, I'm not objecting to any changes, just the
sheer volume.)

The OFED releases of the userspace libraries are not identical to those provided
by the maintainers.  (See libibverbs.)  Whose version of libibverbs does RedHat
plan on using?  How do you manage the differences between OFED and Roland's
libibverbs libraries?

And I'm really not trying to come across harsh here, but if the distros are
willing to pull the OFED code, why should OFA bother trying to merge anything
upstream? 

- Sean

___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg


RE: [ewg] Re: [ofa-general] OFED Jan 28 meeting summary onRC3readiness

2008-01-31 Thread Doug Ledford

On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 10:07 -0800, Sean Hefty wrote:
 In all fairness, the kernel portion of all of this, and the process of
 getting things into Linus' kernel, has *always* been a case of staging
 things in Roland's tree and then merging upstream.  So, at least for the
 kernel, that's mostly true as OFED is pretty close to Roland's tree
 generally speaking.  As for the user space packages though, you guys
 *are* the upstream.  There's no one to merge upstream to and very little
 oversight by anyone.  So, it's entirely up to all of you just how much
 your package seems to be a feature of the day change-athon versus a
 solid, stable program.
 
 I don't believe that this is the model actually in use.  OFED has accepted
 kernel features that have not been submitted for upstream inclusion, or, in 
 some
 cases, that were, but were rejected.  (For examples, see local SA, SA event
 subscription, XRC, SDP, and some of the previous incarnations of IPoIB CM.)
 There are thousands of lines of code difference between OFED and the kernel 
 upon
 which it's based.  (To be clear, I'm not objecting to any changes, just the
 sheer volume.)
 
 The OFED releases of the userspace libraries are not identical to those 
 provided
 by the maintainers.  (See libibverbs.)  Whose version of libibverbs does 
 RedHat
 plan on using?  How do you manage the differences between OFED and Roland's
 libibverbs libraries?
 
 And I'm really not trying to come across harsh here, but if the distros are
 willing to pull the OFED code, why should OFA bother trying to merge anything
 upstream? 

I pull *some* OFED code.  I don't pull it all.  There are things in OFED
I won't accept until they've gone upstream.  Hence, RDS is not in our
offering.  We made the mistake of taking SDP long ago and we'll carry
that forward, but we generally look for things to be upstream before
pulling them from OFED at this point (or at least have been submitted
upstream and is being worked towards acceptance).

In terms of user space, given a choice between a released tarball or the
custom OFED tarball, I choose the released tarball.  So, I currently
have Roland's libibverbs, libmthca, and libmlx4.

-- 
Doug Ledford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
  http://people.redhat.com/dledford

Infiniband specific RPMs available at
  http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg

Re: [ewg] Re: [ofa-general] OFED Jan 28 meeting summary onRC3readiness

2008-01-31 Thread Gleb Natapov
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 01:30:23PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
  And I'm really not trying to come across harsh here, but if the distros are
  willing to pull the OFED code, why should OFA bother trying to merge 
  anything
  upstream? 
 
 I pull *some* OFED code.  I don't pull it all.  There are things in OFED
 I won't accept until they've gone upstream.  Hence, RDS is not in our
 offering.  We made the mistake of taking SDP long ago and we'll carry
What about XRC?

--
Gleb.
___
ewg mailing list
ewg@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg