Re: [net-next PATCH 00/15] eth: fbnic: Add network driver for Meta Platforms Host Network Interface

Jacob Keller
2024-04-10T21:30:13Z

On 4/10/2024 12:26 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 11:06:05PM CEST, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com wrote:
>> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Wed, 03 Apr 2024 13:08:24 -0700 Alexander Duyck wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>
>> 2. whether new device features can be supported without at least
>> two available devices supporting it.
>>
>
> [...]
>
>>
>> 2 is out of scope for this series. But I would always want to hear
>> about potential new features that an organization finds valuable
>> enough to implement. Rather than a blanket rule against them.
>
> This appears out of the nowhere. In the past, I would say wast majority
> of the features was merged with single device implementation. Often, it
> is the only device out there at a time that supports the feature.
> This limitation would put break for feature additions. I can put a long
> list of features that would not be here ever (like 50% of mlxsw driver).
>
>>
>>
>

Jakub already mentioned this being nuanced in a previous part of the
thread. In reality, lots of features do get implemented by only one
driver first.

I think its good practice to ensure multiple vendors/drivers can use
whatever common uAPI or kernel API exists. It can be frustrating when
some new API gets introduced but then can't be used by another device..
In most cases thats on the vendors for being slow to respond or work
with each other when developing the new API.