From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kcp: add kernel control path kernel
	module
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 16:27:53 +0100
Message-ID: <10282518.JsUflhI4Jn@xps13>
References: <1453911849-16562-1-git-send-email-ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
 <56D42CE5.5000901@intel.com> <56D4618E.4090101@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7406CAE
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 16:29:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id p65so73720536wmp.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 07:29:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <56D4618E.4090101@redhat.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-02-29 17:19, Panu Matilainen:
> On 02/29/2016 01:35 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > On 2/29/2016 11:06 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I totally agree with Avi's comments.
> >> This topic is really important for the future of DPDK.
> >> So I think we must give some time to continue the discussion
> >> and have netdev involved in the choices done.
> >> As a consequence, these series should not be merged in the release 16.04.
> >> Thanks for continuing the work.
> >>
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > It is great to have some discussion and feedbacks.
> > But I doubt not merging in this release will help to have more discussion.
> >
> > It is better to have them in this release and let people experiment it,
> > this gives more chance to better discussion.
> >
> > These features are replacement of KNI, and KNI is not intended to be
> > removed in this release, so who are using KNI as solution can continue
> > to use KNI and can test KCP/KDP, so that we can get more feedbacks.
> 
> So make the work available from a separate git repo and make it easy for 
> people to experiment with it. Code doesn't have to be in a release for 
> the sake of experimenting, and removing code is much harder than not 
> adding it in the first place, witness KNI.

Good idea.
What about a -next tree to experiment on kernel interactions?