From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 6 22:40:07 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4491065696 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:40:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net) Received: from mail.cksoft.de (mail.cksoft.de [IPv6:2001:4068:10::3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D4FF8FC18 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (amavis.fra.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71]) by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D7941C670; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:40:06 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cksoft.de Received: from mail.cksoft.de ([192.168.74.103]) by localhost (amavis.fra.cksoft.de [192.168.74.71]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u+ylsl5I1Srh; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:40:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.cksoft.de (Postfix, from userid 66) id E133F41C66F; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:40:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net (maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net [10.111.66.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 517AB4448F3; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:37:36 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:37:35 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" X-X-Sender: bz@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net To: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: <4D260E0D.8080003@bsdimp.com> Message-ID: <20110106222945.R14966@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <82826.1294088199@critter.freebsd.dk> <20110106140722.E14966@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <4D260E0D.8080003@bsdimp.com> X-OpenPGP-Key: 0x14003F198FEFA3E77207EE8D2B58B8F83CCF1842 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Linux kernel compatability X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 22:40:08 -0000 On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Warner Losh wrote: > On 01/06/2011 07:17, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: >> On Mon, 3 Jan 2011, Jeff Roberson wrote: >> >>> Unfortunately it would create quite a lot of code churn as there are >>> relatively few that are minorly different. You can page through the >>> wrapper code if you're interested. >>> >>> http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/projects/ofed/head/sys/ofed/include/linux/ >> >> One thing I am not too sure about is sys/ofed. Given the entire >> discussions it might well be better suited in sys/contrib/ofed under >> the assumtion that the code is mostly maintained outside our tree and >> we get in occational updates. > > If you look at what Jeff has done, you'll see that the external code follows > our standards of residing in sys/contrib/ofed, while the code that glues it > into the tree is in sys/ofed. I might just be too blind to see an ofed there: http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/projects/ofed/head/sys/contrib/ It's rdma I guess. It feels just awkward to have the glue in sys/mumble rather than completely bundled in sys/contrib/ofed/** like we do for ipfilter, pf, ... to my understanding. The real glue into our stack, I assume, sits in net*/* mostly. >> I guess similarly things in user space might go to contrib as well? > src/contrib is for code that's maintained outside the source tree that we > adapt. Are all user space tools hand-rolled or are they ported over as well? Maybe I should wait till Jeff will post the diff to see. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! Going to jail sucks -- All my daemons like it! http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/jails.html