Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 08:41:26 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn <gljennjohn@gmail.com> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> Cc: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r290003 - head/sys/ofed/include/linux Message-ID: <20151030084126.53f7ffce@ernst.home> In-Reply-To: <56323B33.8020505@selasky.org> References: <201510261328.t9QDSYRT076892@repo.freebsd.org> <56302F9D.2020308@freebsd.org> <56308289.4050902@selasky.org> <20151029143651.GN97830@FreeBSD.org> <56323B33.8020505@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:28:51 +0100 Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> wrote: > On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > >> The LinuxKPI is not a binary compatibility module, and will at some > > H> point have API's diverging from Linux, to fit BSD API's better. > > > > This statement makes the name of LinuxKPI quite pointless, as well > > as the whole idea of the KPI unclear. > > Hi, > > To be more clear. Adding bind_irq_to_cpu() is more an exception than the > default. A the moment I think Linux doesn't have an equivalent of this > function, because of Linux's interrupt model. > My question is whether a "normal" FreeBSD user has any reason to enable LinuxKPI now or in the future. -- Gary Jennejohn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20151030084126.53f7ffce>