RE: calling oem sal functions

From: John Lee <jlee_at_platsolns.com>
Date: 2004-08-20 08:14:20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-ia64-owner@vger.kernel.org 
> [mailto:linux-ia64-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Robin Holt
...
> 
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 06:29:04PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 05:23:46PM +0000, Tony Luck wrote:
....
> > > 
> > > Would you also need "_nolock" and "_reentrant" versions?

Yes, that would be perfect.

> > 
> > Please make the exports _GPL so we have the callers under rcontrol.
> 
> If you make them GPL, it makes the call useless to SGI.  Some of our
> tests suites have the problem description we are testing for and the
> resolution.  This may include vendor specific or customer specific
> data which is not disclosable.  Some of the vendor specific tests are
> likewise covered by NDA.  I understand you would love to have
> everything _GPL, but that is unreasonable.
> 
> All that is being provided here is a gateway to SAL.  How much value
> is the kernel community adding.
> 
> Tony, please carefully consider the _GPL.
> 

I have to second to this.

John
Platform Solutions
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Thu Aug 19 18:17:53 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:29 EST