[B.A.T.M.A.N.] Getting batman into staging

[B.A.T.M.A.N.] Getting batman into staging

[Andrew Lunn]

Hi Folks

Here is the email i sent to Greg KH about getting into staging

     Andrew

----------------------------------------------------------------------

> Hi Greg
>
> I've decided to take on the challenge of getting batman-advanced into
> mainline. This is a challenge since as to date all i've had committed
> to mainline are a few USB querks for devices i happen to have.
>
> B.A.T.M.A.N. (better approach to mobile ad-hoc networking) is a
> routing protocol for multi-hop ad-hoc mesh networks. It can be used
> over wireless and wired links. Batman is used for example in Berlin to
> provide their "Freifunknetzes", free wireless network, and in many
> other cities.
>
> The project website can be found at:
>
> http://www.open-mesh.org/
>
> My first question would be is this something that can go into
> staging?  It is not a device driver or a filesystem which seems to
> be the major usage for staging. The only exception i found to this
> is the openPOWERLINK protocol stack. Batman layers on top of the
> wireless and wired network devices, exporting a virtual network
> device for accessing the resulting mesh.  The nice thing about
> batman is that it is completely contained. It does not need any
> patches anywhere else, which does fit with the staging model.
>
> The source code is currently in a subversion repository:
>
> http://downloads.open-mesh.net/svn/batman/trunk/batman-adv-kernelland/
>
> I also have a list of things which i think need doing:
>
> Finish stripping out debug_log.
>
> Make batctl, the user space configuration tool, standalone.
>
> Maybe make batctl _The_ tool for configuration and status and
> depreciate direct /proc access, so that we can restructure it without
> too much pain for users.
>
> Take out the dot_draw/josm formatting in /proc/net/batman-adv/vis and
> put it into userspace as part of batctl.
>
> Think if /proc/net/batman-adv should be renamed /proc/net/bat0 giving
> the option of /proc/net/bat1 etc in the future?
>
> Should /proc/net/batman-adv/interface be replaced with an IOCTL interface
> similar to brctl?
>
> Maybe move orig_interval, aggregate_ogm and write half of vis to
> /sys/class/batman/bat0/?
>
> Investigate if there is a generic linux hash algorithm which should be used?
>
> Strip out all backward compatibility support to older kernels.
>
> Make use of printk %pM support.
>
> The code is however sparse clean and checkpatch only complains about a
> few lines being longer than 80 characters. Most of these are printk
> like statements.
>
> My second question would be when is the right time to get into
> staging? 
>
> Should i work on all these issues first? Or can it go into staging
> with some of these issues in a TODO file, to be joined by new issues
> as the code is reviewed by more experts?

Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Getting batman into staging

[Andrew Lunn]

Hi Greg

CC: to the batman list should now work for you. Your email address has
been listed as O.K. to accept. There is an ongoing discussion about an
open list and fighting SPAM etc.

> But first off, what is keeping this code from being added to the "main"
> portion of the kernel tree?  Have you submitted it for inclusion there
> already?  If so, what was the response?  If not, why not?
 
I'm reasonably new to the project so don't know the history too
well. I get the impression the code has not been sent to lkml or
linux-net list. There seems to be a perception within the developers
that getting code into mainline is difficult, so why bother when it
has been going O.K. out of mainline. I think you saying it could go
into staging right now has taken quite a few people by surprise.

Is staging the right way to do this? Is posting to say linux-net
better for this sort of code?

> Sound good?  If so, send me some patches!

Assuming we do go via staging, do you want one jumbo patch, 6500 lines
of code, or should i break it up into smaller chunks?

   Thanks
        Andrew

Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Getting batman into staging

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:25:48PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Hi Greg
> 
> CC: to the batman list should now work for you. Your email address has
> been listed as O.K. to accept. There is an ongoing discussion about an
> open list and fighting SPAM etc.

Heh, that's normal.  I run a few open lists, and it's not that hard.

> > But first off, what is keeping this code from being added to the "main"
> > portion of the kernel tree?  Have you submitted it for inclusion there
> > already?  If so, what was the response?  If not, why not?
>  
> I'm reasonably new to the project so don't know the history too
> well. I get the impression the code has not been sent to lkml or
> linux-net list. There seems to be a perception within the developers
> that getting code into mainline is difficult, so why bother when it
> has been going O.K. out of mainline. I think you saying it could go
> into staging right now has taken quite a few people by surprise.

That's what staging is for!

> Is staging the right way to do this? Is posting to say linux-net
> better for this sort of code?

staging gets pulled into linux-next automatically.  linux-next is only
for what is going to be in the "next" kernel release (2.6.32 for right
now).  So, you would have to have the code up to mergable standards, and
approved by the network maintainers before it could go into linux-next
on its own.

> > Sound good?  If so, send me some patches!
> 
> Assuming we do go via staging, do you want one jumbo patch, 6500 lines
> of code, or should i break it up into smaller chunks?

6500 lines is nothing :)

Whatever you feel is a "logical" chunk would be good to have.

thanks,

greg k-h