lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: A proposal - binary
    On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:26:16PM -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote:
    > Greg KH wrote:
    > >On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:14:21AM -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote:
    > >
    > >>I would like to propose an interface for linking a GPL kernel,
    > >>specifically, Linux, against binary blobs.
    > >>
    > >
    > >Sorry, but we aren't lawyers here, we are programmers. Do you have a
    > >patch that shows what you are trying to describe here? Care to post it?
    > >
    >
    > <Posts kernel/module.c unmodified>

    If you want to stick with the current kernel module interface, I don't
    see why you even need to bring this up, there are no arguments about
    that API being in constant flux :)

    > >How does this differ with the way that the Xen developers are proposing?
    > >Why haven't you worked with them to find a solution that everyone likes?
    > >
    >
    > We want our backend to provide a greater degree of stability than a pure
    > source level API as the Xen folks have proposed. We have tried to
    > convince them that an ABI is in their best interest, but they are
    > reluctant to commit to one or codesign one at this time.

    Don't you feel it's a bit early to "commit" to anything yet when we
    don't have a working implementation? Things change over time, and it's
    one of the main reasons Linux is so successful.

    > >And what about Rusty's proposal that is supposed to be the "middle
    > >ground" between the two competing camps? How does this differ from
    > >that? Why don't you like Rusty's proposal?
    > >
    >
    > Who said that? Please smack them on the head with a broom. We are all
    > actively working on implementing Rusty's paravirt-ops proposal. It
    > makes the API vs ABI discussion moot, as it allow for both.

    So everyone is still skirting the issue, oh great :)

    > >Please, start posting code and work together with the other people that
    > >are wanting to achive the same end goal as you are. That is what really
    > >matters here.
    > >
    >
    > We have already started upstreaming patches. Jeremy, Rusty and I have
    > or will send out sets yesterday / today. We haven't been vocal on LKML,
    > as we'd just be adding noise. We are working with Rusty and the Xen
    > developers, and you can see our patchset here:
    >
    > http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/paravirt/?cl=tip
    >
    > And follow our development discussions here:
    >
    > http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/virtualization/

    I really don't want to follow the discussion unless necessary. I trust
    Chris and Rusty to do the right thing in this area...

    thanks,

    greg k-h
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-03 22:09    [W:4.446 / U:0.108 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site