Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 10:51:42PM CEST, kuba@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >On Wed, 03 Apr 2024 13:08:24 -0700 Alexander Duyck wrote: >> This patch set includes the necessary patches to enable basic Tx and Rx >> over the Meta Platforms Host Network Interface. To do this we introduce a >> new driver and driver and directories in the form of >> "drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic". > >Let me try to restate some takeaways and ask for further clarification >on the main question... > >First, I think there's broad support for merging the driver itself. > >IIUC there is also broad support to raise the expectations from >maintainers of drivers for private devices, specifically that they will: > - receive weaker "no regression" guarantees > - help with refactoring / adapting their drivers more actively :) > - not get upset when we delete those drivers if they stop participating Sorry for being pain, but I would still like to see some sumarization of what is actually the gain for the community to merge this unused driver. So far, I don't recall to read anything solid. btw: Kconfig description should contain: Say N here, you can't ever see this device in real world. > >If you think that the drivers should be merged *without* setting these >expectations, please speak up. > >Nobody picked me up on the suggestion to use the CI as a proactive >check whether the maintainer / owner is still paying attention, >but okay :( > > >What is less clear to me is what do we do about uAPI / core changes. >Of those who touched on the subject - few people seem to be curious / >welcoming to any reasonable features coming out for private devices >(John, Olek, Florian)? Others are more cautious focusing on blast >radius and referring to the "two driver rule" (Daniel, Paolo)? >Whether that means outright ban on touching common code or uAPI >in ways which aren't exercised by commercial NICs, is unclear. For these kind of unused drivers, I think it would be legit to disallow any internal/external api changes. Just do that for some normal driver, then benefit from the changes in the unused driver. Now the question is, how to distinguish these 2 driver kinds? Maybe to put them under some directory so it is clear? drivers/net/unused/ethernet/meta/fbnic/ >Andrew and Ed did not address the question directly AFAICT. > >Is my reading correct? Does anyone have an opinion on whether we should >try to dig more into this question prior to merging the driver, and >set some ground rules? Or proceed and learn by doing? >
