Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:59:20 -0700 From: YongHyeon PYUN <pyunyh@gmail.com> To: Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Hooman Fazaeli <fazaeli@sepehrs.com>, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>, jfv@freebsd.org, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: intel checksum offload Message-ID: <20110919165920.GA4202@michelle.cdnetworks.com> In-Reply-To: <CACqU3MWEdcDeUtFocS9%2B1nrJQ5VjwJDr8nggyRz7JLN6ZbK=QQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <20110917203218.GC13993@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <CACqU3MXffDvH%2B5E3_excGswvsYx0eJ1WxTP16tswy9eK%2BvyH%2Bg@mail.gmail.com> <20110918210647.GA8930@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <CACqU3MXSms9M-H9jj6zf5qWo05SLNCDBwDv%2B%2BmW5iTNjNLuKkA@mail.gmail.com> <20110919020131.GA11657@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <CACqU3MV3MHGpV0SR36Ur9cPfGzh4K82dop1mXVRkk51mTCpTrQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFOYbcktOR4SOuktOfQc0WvbQvH-9ViUeAQ4JJax_VbebWnC6w@mail.gmail.com> <4E76E5B9.9080301@sepehrs.com> <CAJ-Vmo=yaMTeSi07-zZNMnarwazpYUWSvit33Bfpx8Wd0U%2BkEg@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MWEdcDeUtFocS9%2B1nrJQ5VjwJDr8nggyRz7JLN6ZbK=QQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:17:22AM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Arnaud (and others), > > > > Liaising with vendors is not an easy task. The reason why Intel (and > > other vendors) don't supply detailed history and reasoning for their > > development efforts is that their engineers are likely tasked with > > "making it work" versus "writing lots of stuff down for public > > release." In some instances, the vendor support of FreeBSD (and "free" > > open source in general) is done as a side-project by some of the > > engineers inside the company. > > > > So in this case, you may find that Jack and the other engineers at > > Intel just don't have the time or resources to dedicate the kinds of > > feedback and support you seem to be after. He and others likely have a > > huge set of tasks to do at work and none of them officially include > > "support FreeBSD/Linux developers by providing detailed feedback and > > assistance." So whenever Jack pops up to help out, he's likely doing > > it in his spare time. :-) > > > Yes, and he seems to really like to waste his spare time by repeating > me for two months to increase `kern.ipc.nmbclusters' to fix issue I > was seeing, when the code was clearly buggy, even when I sent him > patchs fixing issues. > If you think you encountered a driver bug, could you share it with us? I didn't closely follow em(4)/lem(4)/igb(4) changes for a long time so I'm not sure whether I can come up with reasonable fix for the issue but I may be able to help you. > That's sure a very efficient way of managing time. > > - Arnaud > > > Developers can and will disable or remove functionality which is > > problematic because they don't have the time or resources to support > > it. Users may wish to turn on unsupported features and then will > > complain loudly when they don't work; even giving up and moving to > > another piece of equipment because of perceived issues. I agree that > > it would be nice if the developers included _all_ features, > > unsupported or not, so that developers can choose to work on them if > > they wish. It however is a trade-off between trying to provide > > developers with more useful things to tinker with and not increasing > > support load from users (and other developers) who seek to use > > incomplete features. > > > > I hope this helps. > > > > > > Adrian > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110919165920.GA4202>