Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 07:52:54 -0700 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: "gljennjohn@gmail.com" <gljennjohn@gmail.com> Cc: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r290003 - head/sys/ofed/include/linux Message-ID: <0F2249D2-D5F9-4C8C-BA90-DEFEA7C7B00F@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20151030111520.09826845@ernst.home> References: <201510261328.t9QDSYRT076892@repo.freebsd.org> <56302F9D.2020308@freebsd.org> <56308289.4050902@selasky.org> <20151029143651.GN97830@FreeBSD.org> <56323B33.8020505@selasky.org> <20151030084126.53f7ffce@ernst.home> <56332494.4050709@selasky.org> <20151030111520.09826845@ernst.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Oct 30, 2015, at 03:15, Gary Jennejohn <gljennjohn@gmail.com> wrote: >=20 > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:04:36 +0100 > Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> wrote: >=20 >>> On 10/30/15 08:41, Gary Jennejohn wrote: >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:28:51 +0100 >>> Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> wrote: >>>=20 >>>> On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: =20 >>>>>> 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. =20= >>>>>=20 >>>>> This statement makes the name of LinuxKPI quite pointless, as well >>>>> as the whole idea of the KPI unclear. =20 >>>>=20 >>>> Hi, >>>>=20 >>>> To be more clear. Adding bind_irq_to_cpu() is more an exception than th= e >>>> default. A the moment I think Linux doesn't have an equivalent of this >>>> function, because of Linux's interrupt model. >>>=20 >>> My question is whether a "normal" FreeBSD user has any reason to >>> enable LinuxKPI now or in the future. >>=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >> If drivers which depend on this feature are KLD's there's no reason to=20= >> enable this by default in GENERIC. The current and future clients of=20 >> LINUXKPI will possibly be KLD's and then MODULE_DEPEND() will do the=20 >> magic behind the scenes. Was this your question? >=20 > Well, I guess the answer is "no", if I understand you correctly. >=20 >=20 Only device driver developers need to think about this. Users don't. It's pu= rely to make development simpler. If a user uses such a driver it will load t= his module automatically. It won't let anyone load a Linux driver, it is onl= y for FreeBSD drivers using Linux-like code to make porting and maintenance s= impler.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0F2249D2-D5F9-4C8C-BA90-DEFEA7C7B00F>