svn commit: r290003 - head/sys/ofed/include/linux

[Gary Jennejohn]

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:04:36 +0100
Hans Petter Selasky <hps at selasky.org> wrote:

> On 10/30/15 08:41, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:28:51 +0100
> > Hans Petter Selasky <hps at selasky.org> wrote:
> >  
> >> On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:  
> >>>> The LinuxKPI is not a binary compatibility module, and will at some
> >>> H> point have API's diverging from Linux, to fit BSD API's better.  
> >>>
> >>> This statement makes the name of LinuxKPI quite pointless, as well
> >>> as the whole idea of the KPI unclear.  
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> To be more clear. Adding bind_irq_to_cpu() is more an exception than the
> >> default. A the moment I think Linux doesn't have an equivalent of this
> >> function, because of Linux's interrupt model.
> >>  
> >
> > My question is whether a "normal" FreeBSD user has any reason to
> > enable LinuxKPI now or in the future.
> >  
> 
> Hi,
> 
> If drivers which depend on this feature are KLD's there's no reason to 
> enable this by default in GENERIC. The current and future clients of 
> LINUXKPI will possibly be KLD's and then MODULE_DEPEND() will do the 
> magic behind the scenes. Was this your question?
> 

Well, I guess the answer is "no", if I understand you correctly.

-- 
Gary Jennejohn