[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160121.112139.865122294942281441.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:21:39 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: gerlitz.or@...il.com
Cc: faisal.latif@...el.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com,
swise@...ngridcomputing.com, dledford@...hat.com,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, e1000-rdma@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] add Intel X722 iWARP driver
From: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 20:40:53 +0200
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Faisal Latif <faisal.latif@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> We can certainly take up the discussion on improving the current port mapper design/implementation. But
>> that would be more appropriate in a separate thread.
>
> If we observe a kernel API / mechanism which could be wrongly
> duplicated between two drivers, and now a new driver comes to town
> with C&P-ing this -- why not stopping and thinking before rushing to
> get the 3rd duplication upstream?
Yes, this really looks like a huge disaster.
People have to stop doing unique APIs in their drivers, especially
when equivalent functionality exists generically.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists