[PATCH] hwpmc(4) changes to use 'mp_maxid' instead of 'mp_ncpus'.

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <20080313200839.S1091 at desktop>
            Jeff Roberson <jroberson at chesapeake.net> writes:
: In general we accept vendor patches that are not disruptive even in the 
: case that the general communit doesn't perceive the real value.  It is 
: important for us to work with and encourage vendors.
...
: The rest of the generic code in the kernel already supports this.  Juniper 
: claims to have tested and is using this feature.  Furthermore, it will get 
: us a tiny step closer to being able to support pluggable cpus in a 
: virtualized environment.

I'd like to echo these sentiments.  We've generally been willing to
accept code from vendors that makes their lives easier, even when that
code doesn't directly benefit the project.  We do this on the theory
that if we make their life easy, they will contribute to the project.
Juniper has certainly given a large chunk of code to the project (a
fairly complete MIPS port that has been integrated with the so-called
"mips2" port and will be headed into the tree soonish), which is
certainly a lot more code than has been given from vendors whom we've
made much bigger accommodations to.

In this case a vendor came forward with a patch that introduces no
real additional burdon to the volunteers who are maintaining the
code.  It seems like a no brainer to me to commit it.  There's
certainly no compelling technical argument against it.

I work for Cisco.  Cisco has no love for Juniper, and vice versa.
However, I put that aside for the good of the project and work with
people from Juniper all the time to make the project better by
focusing on the technology.  The project has similar expectations for
all its developers: if there's a technical reason to not do something,
then that's OK.  If there's a political reason, especially one that
isn't shared honestly an openly, then the bar is much much higher to
exclude the technology from the tree.  What would people think if I
were to block the MIPS stuff from Juniper just because it came from
Juniper and I work for a company that is in competition with Juniper?
I don't think it would be too favorable.

Warner