Re: [PATCH 02/22] Firmware interface code for IB device.

[Greg KH]

On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 08:32:28AM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
>     Arjan> The bigger issue is: if people can't be bothered to do
>     Arjan> those steps, why would they be bothered to do this for
>     Arjan> maintenance and bugfixes etc etc?  Basically it's now
>     Arjan> already a de-facto unmaintained driver....
> 
> I don't think that's really a fair statement.  The IBM people have
> been active and responsive in maintaining their driving in the
> openib.org svn tree.  However, they asked me to post their driver for
> review because it would be difficult for them to do it.

Checking stuff into a private svn tree is vastly different from posting
to lkml in public.  In fact, it looks like the svn tree is so far ahead
of the in-kernel stuff, that most people are just using it instead of
the in-kernel code.

I know at least one company has asked a distro to just accept the svn
snapshot over the in-kernel IB code, which makes me wonder if the
in-kernel stuff is even useful to people?  Why have it, if companies
insist on using the out-of-tree stuff instead?

thanks,

greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/