AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@lsi.com
RQ:
SSV:mhbs.lsil.com
NSV:
SSH:
R:<bfisher@lsi.com>,<Rendell.Fong@lsi.com>
MAID:2
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/LSI/INBOX	0	4A97325A.4040002@lsi.com
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:20:23 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com>
To: William Fisher <bfisher@lsi.com>
Cc: "Fong, Rendell" <Rendell.Fong@lsi.com>
Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 33235 for review
Message-ID: <20090827192023.55581d4b@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <4A97325A.4040002@lsi.com>
References: <WEBMAIL5GpbOkTd3j1300027b05@mail.onstor.com>
	<20090827161253.5a800756@ripper.onstor.net>
	<1251416106.23744.84.camel@rendellf>
	<20090827164830.6b555a63@ripper.onstor.net>
	<4A971CF6.4010904@lsi.com>
	<20090827170216.01b08748@ripper.onstor.net>
	<4A971F3E.4020102@lsi.com>
	<20090827174703.7a4de431@ripper.onstor.net>
	<4A97325A.4040002@lsi.com>
Organization: LSI
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:26:50 -0600 William Fisher <bfisher@lsi.com>
wrote:

> Andrew Sharp wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 18:05:18 -0600 William Fisher <bfisher@lsi.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Andrew Sharp wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:55:34 -0600 William Fisher <bfisher@lsi.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Andrew Sharp wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:35:06 -0600 Rendell Fong
> >>>>><Rendell.Fong@lsi.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Bill,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Can you do the merge your latest changes from neteee-ui, neteee2
> >>>>>>and tpl directories into nfx-tree.  I don't want to get in the
> >>>>>>middle of this since there are some conflicts between your
> >>>>>>changes and Andy's changes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>There's no need to wait for Bill to do that.  Removing these from
> >>>>>the kernel tree can be done now.  There has been very few changes
> >>>>>since I took this cut.  Definitely hasn't been any to the ui
> >>>>>directory, I'm guessing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>explain to me why the Kconfig changes need to be "axed"?
> >>>>
> >>>>I would like to have all of the eee(os) specified
> >>>>header files, now under tpl/ move to something under include
> >>>>under the kernel tree.
> >>>>
> >>>>This can wait but having lots of kernel changes without
> >>>>following the kernel src code tree conventions is leading
> >>>>to conflicts later,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Yes, sorry, mispoke myself.  I meant related makefile lines.
> >>
> >> >
> >>Ok the netee2 makefile contents are:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>obj-$(CONFIG_NETEEE2) += neteee2.o
> >>>obj-y     := eee-app.o eee-desc.o eee-fwd.o eee-init.o eee-ipc.o
> >>>eee-msg.o eee-poll.o eee-queue.o eee-utils.o eee-d\rv.o eee-timer.o
> >>>eee-timer-api.o
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>What are you proposing instead?
> > 
> > 
> > It's already covered in the nfx-tree/code/Makefile
> 
> Ok, you have the Makefile from hell. A huge chunk
> with hundred's of files are driven off the symbols
> CONFIG_ONSTOR_NFS and CONFIG_ONSTOR_TUXRX.

Nothing wrong with that.  Maybe we want to change the names or
consolidate, sure, whatever.

> You have also created parallel directories
> for all the Linux code which replaces
> the old EEE code.

Much discussed and well known, yes?

> The fly in the ointment is the rcon shell
> and associated stuff must initialize
> before this huge module is loaded.
> They are in bed with the rcon device driver
> and the mgmtbus support code.

The ointment looks pretty clear to me.  I don't see any problem with
here.  The initialization sequence is very controllable to our
heart's content.

> ====================
> Since this module has not been integrated
> nor have any of all my tests and kernels
> run with this, we have some work to do
> to get back to where I was three weeks ago.

I realize that, and I realize it isn't entirely fair.

> That is the goal ASAP. Rendall and I
> are working toward that goal.
> We are not there yet. Are you going
> to help us?

Why is that the goal ASAP?  Not that I have a problem with that, but...
perhaps I shouldn't ask.

I am here to help in any way I can.  I'm serious when I say dump on me
whatever you want to in the way of tasks.  You guys are supposed to do
the real brainiac work, I'm supposed to do the janitorial work.  And to
make sure your boat doesn't get pointed towards shore while you're
looking at the code.


> Rendall and I are going to get back to
> where we were and then work on this
> chunk to get a module loading, initializing
> and running the ACPU thread.
> =========================
> 
> Where is the ACPU thread code in this scheme?
> I am using my version that is running doing the
> ncpu calling of the registered functions, etc.
> We need to add this to the scheme.

I was assuming your version was the only real version at this point, so
I don't even bother mentioning versions.

> I would like to remove the CONFIG_TUXRX_ACPU configuration
> symbol from the kernel. I will hack that out, make
> it a thread and move it to a nfx-tree/code directory
> sometime next week.

I think that code can stay where it is.  It doesn't have a natural home
in the nfx-tree directory.  Why do you want to get rid of that symbol?
Or perhaps I should say, what do you want to replace it with?  We can
definitely do a bit of config symbol consolidation, it just hasn't
seemed to be a high priority at the moment.

Hmm, OK, I think I see what you're getting at a little better.  Perhaps
a discussion is necessary.


> On a side note, Max has told me he is NOT going to
> work on the fs_threads task and only the two guys
> from India are going to be doing the work. Hence
> that task is in our court to solve.

Yes, well, also a topic for a non-email discussion.  Let's just say I
didn't know men could have menstrual cycles, despite the name.  I won't
have a major cow if I have to do it.

> =================================
> 
> The NETRMC code also needs a home and currently
> that is under the kernel tree.

I'm not getting anything ... do you think it's OK to stay there?  Fine
by me.

Let's pick this up tomorrow, as I have to take off.
