Outdated Sangoma Drivers

Outdated Sangoma Drivers

[Simon Morgan]

Hi,

I couldn't help noticing that the Sangoma drivers distributed with the
current kernel are slightly out of date and was wondering whether there
was any reason for this?

For example the kernel copy of sdla.c was last updated Mar 20, 2001 while
the version contained in the drivers distributed on sangoma.com[1] was
last updated Dec 15. 2003.

[1] ftp://ftp.sangoma.com/linux/current_wanpipe/

Re: Outdated Sangoma Drivers

[Jesper Juhl]

On 8/6/05, Simon Morgan <sjmorgan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I couldn't help noticing that the Sangoma drivers distributed with the
> current kernel are slightly out of date and was wondering whether there
> was any reason for this?
> 
Probably nobody has taken the time to do a diff between the kernel's
current version and the the one distributed by sangoma.

If someone (hint hint) was to do a diff, clean it up to ensure it
matches kernel CodingStyle and standards and then send it in along
with a description of the changes made and why they make sense, what
bugs it fixes etc, then that person could probably get such a diff
merged.


-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html

Re: Outdated Sangoma Drivers

[Jiri Slaby]

Jesper Juhl napsal(a):

>On 8/6/05, Simon Morgan <sjmorgan@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I couldn't help noticing that the Sangoma drivers distributed with the
>>current kernel are slightly out of date and was wondering whether there
>>was any reason for this?
>>
>>    
>>
>Probably nobody has taken the time to do a diff between the kernel's
>current version and the the one distributed by sangoma.
>
>If someone (hint hint) was to do a diff, clean it up to ensure it
>matches kernel CodingStyle and standards and then send it in along
>with a description of the changes made and why they make sense, what
>bugs it fixes etc, then that person could probably get such a diff
>merged.
>  
>
I'll try to get in that.

-- 
Jiri Slaby         www.fi.muni.cz/~xslaby
~\-/~      jirislaby@gmail.com      ~\-/~
241B347EC88228DE51EE A49C4A73A25004CB2A10

Re: Outdated Sangoma Drivers

[Jiri Slaby]

Simon Morgan napsal(a):

>Hi,
>
>I couldn't help noticing that the Sangoma drivers distributed with the
>current kernel are slightly out of date and was wondering whether there
>was any reason for this?
>
>For example the kernel copy of sdla.c was last updated Mar 20, 2001 while
>the version contained in the drivers distributed on sangoma.com[1] was
>last updated Dec 15. 2003.
>
Hi,
this is letter from sangoma:
<cite>
the sdla.c is not Sangoma's file :) or if it is it should be erased.  
The sdla.c
has not been used since 2001.

It is true that wanpipe drivers are not part of linux 2.6 kernel.  We have
been so busy developing that there is no way the linux kernel could
keep up with the changes.

Bottom line we have to put a whole new wanpipe driver into the kernel
source, and that is a big task.
It is much easier for us to ask people to use our drivers from the web.
Once the wanpipe drivers stop changing so fast we will be able
to push the new release into the kernel.  It doesn't make sense to do it 
now
because if anyone wants to use wanpipe, that person would have to
get the latest drivers from the web!
</cite>

So what do you think we would do?
Add some lines to Kconfig with address of ftp sangoma?
Delete old version from the tree and wait for the new one?

Re: Outdated Sangoma Drivers

[Adrian Bunk]

On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 09:01:34PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Simon Morgan napsal(a):
> 
> >Hi,
> >
> >I couldn't help noticing that the Sangoma drivers distributed with the
> >current kernel are slightly out of date and was wondering whether there
> >was any reason for this?
> >
> >For example the kernel copy of sdla.c was last updated Mar 20, 2001 while
> >the version contained in the drivers distributed on sangoma.com[1] was
> >last updated Dec 15. 2003.
> >
> Hi,
> this is letter from sangoma:
> <cite>
> the sdla.c is not Sangoma's file :) or if it is it should be erased.  
> The sdla.c
> has not been used since 2001.
> 
> It is true that wanpipe drivers are not part of linux 2.6 kernel.  We have
> been so busy developing that there is no way the linux kernel could
> keep up with the changes.
> 
> Bottom line we have to put a whole new wanpipe driver into the kernel
> source, and that is a big task.
> It is much easier for us to ask people to use our drivers from the web.
> Once the wanpipe drivers stop changing so fast we will be able
> to push the new release into the kernel.  It doesn't make sense to do it 
> now
> because if anyone wants to use wanpipe, that person would have to
> get the latest drivers from the web!
> </cite>
> 
> So what do you think we would do?
> Add some lines to Kconfig with address of ftp sangoma?
> Delete old version from the tree and wait for the new one?

The common way to handle this is to simply keep the version that is now 
in the kernel.

If someone wants to send updates for a driver for review he can always 
do so. If they dont want to get their driver updated in the kernel it's 
their problem - and not a reason to reward them with a link to their 
site.

Oh, one reason why they don't want to submit their latest driver might 
be that their driver is using with binary-only code if you activate 
their ADSL or ATM code...

OTOH, I don't see a compelling reason for removing the version currently 
in the tree (part of the drivers is BROKEN, but even this doesn't do 
much harm).

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: Outdated Sangoma Drivers

[Simon Morgan]

On 8/6/05, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is true that wanpipe drivers are not part of linux 2.6 kernel.  We have
> been so busy developing that there is no way the linux kernel could
> keep up with the changes.

I guess this is the key statement and I'm not really the one to judge
whether or not the kernel could "keep up with the changes" but if
they mean the kernel development process then surely they're
wrong?

> Bottom line we have to put a whole new wanpipe driver into the kernel
> source, and that is a big task.

Surely it can't be that big a task if they distribute a shell script with their
drivers that does it automagically?

> It is much easier for us to ask people to use our drivers from the web.
> Once the wanpipe drivers stop changing so fast we will be able
> to push the new release into the kernel.  It doesn't make sense to do it
> now because if anyone wants to use wanpipe, that person would have
> to get the latest drivers from the web!

They're obviously working against a copy of the kernel when they write their
drivers so I don't see how difficult it would be to submit incremental diff's
for inclusion or at least the diff's between each stable version.

But I digress.. I guess it comes down to whether anybody is willing to put
in the effort to incorporate the current version into the kernel. If
not then, like
Adrian says, it's probably best just to leave it for the time being and if later
on down the line they still haven't submitted an updated version then
incorporating one or removing the old one. I'd be more willing to do the
former if I had more than 0 experience of kernel development.