Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 19:34:42 +0100 From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> To: stable@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Cc: pyunyh@gmail.com, Christian Brueffer <brueffer@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: deprecation of nve(4) in 10-STABLE and removal from 11-CURRENT Message-ID: <201402061834.s16IYgDK044802@fire.js.berklix.net> In-Reply-To: Your message "Thu, 06 Feb 2014 09:58:32 %2B0900." <20140206005832.GB2810@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yonghyeon PYUN wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 02:56:37PM +0100, Christian Brueffer wrote: > > Hi, > > > > for some time now we have had two drivers for NVIDIA NForce/MCP network > > chips, namely nve(4) and nfe(4). > > > > The former came first and is based on a binary blob. The latter was > > later ported from OpenBSD and is blob-free. > > > > nfe(4) supports all chips nve(4) supports, in addition to all the newer > > hardware. In essence, nfe(4) has been the de-facto standard driver for > > a long time. nve(4) has been commented out in GENERIC since 2007. > > > > For this reason I propose deprecating nve(4) in 10-STABLE and removing > > it from HEAD. > > > > Does anyone see a reason not to do this? > > A couple of users were still using nve(4) in the past. I guess > the issue might be lack of code for waking up MAC/PHY from > powerdown. nfe(4) already has the needed code and should support > all known NVIDIA ethernet controllers with full offloading support. > So no objection from me. It seems a good case to remove nve, no objection. Please remove at a leisurely managed pace: (unless code conflicts press for urgency), ie at least one minor release on each major branch should contain a code revocation warning in the manual & preferably in a src/[A-Z]*, before the next minor release in same major release sequence might no longer contain old code. ( Not to suggest it wasn't planned similarly anyway, but some changes in other areas of FreeBSD have been rushed, & it's good to set an example of planning maturity. ) Some FreeBSD end users inc. customers barely (if even) read announce@, let alone other lists such as these, but some do read manuals, & notice code withdrawal warnings. I informed one old customer who was maybe still using nve, others might take a similar opportunity, a subtle way to also invite people to look at FreeBSD [again] ;-) , referring to eg: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2014-February/048211.html http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/release/10.0.0/share/man/man4/nve.4?view=markup http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/release/10.0.0/share/man/man4/nfe.4?view=markup It seems safe to add a removal warning in http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/share/man/man4/nve.4?view=markup ( there is not one yet at Rev 217468, I just checked. ) Best avoid the obscure word `Deprecated' in manuals: It's not common/ plain English. Maybe a geek import, or USA dialect ? It's not easily internationaly understood English. Best make manuals easier for non native English speakers (& native English too ;-). I am British born & bred, whether in English speaking circles in UK or Germany I never hear or read 'deprecated' unless its in BSD context. Few native English speakers I know will be immediately sure of the meaning, it's too obscure. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Interleave replies below like a play script. Indent old text with "> ". Send plain text, not quoted-printable, HTML, base64, or multipart/alternative.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201402061834.s16IYgDK044802>