On 23/08/11 20:25, Peter J. Pouliot wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 08:03:26PM +0100, Ned Slider wrote: >> On 23/08/11 13:59, Jim Perrin wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Peter J. Pouliot<peter at pouliot.net>wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What license are these drivers covered under? >>>> GPL v2. >>>> >>>> The drivers are currently in staging on the mainline kernel. My goal, >>>> note I am not speaking for the company of I work for (SUSE), or the company >>>> who pays for the room I sit in (MSFT), is to help get the work our team has >>>> done for the last five years integrated into all linux distributions. >>>> >>> >>> So long as they are GPLv2, and your company/code copyright holder is willing >>> to provide something showing there's no danger of lawsuit/DMCA infringement >>> for distribution I see no issues with providing them. >>> >>> >> >> The driver source is already included in the RHEL6 kernel, in >> drivers/staging/hv but because it's still in staging Red Hat chose not >> to enable it by default. >> >> We built the drivers from the RHEL6 code but they seem badly broken: >> >> http://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=165 > > Unfortunately I know. I am still trying to organize the current process so that we can provide more community testing and hopefully provide coverage so that this doesn't happen. > >> >> There were a large number of patches submitted for inclusion in >> kernel-3.0 (still in staging) but backporting this code to RHEL6 is not >> trivial. > > I know. We have individuals who have already done parts of the backporting that are currently going through testing. > >> >> As it's not enabled by default, I would guess the chances of Red Hat >> backporting fixes to RHEL6 are less than zero, regardless of the politics. >> >> To start with I guess we would need working code that builds on RHEL6 :-) > > I can definately provide this. > Great - do you have a git repo or such where we can pull the code from please?