RE: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?

RE: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?

[Kevin Curtis]

Hi,
	we use the generic HDLC module (by patch) in 2.4 with our FarSync
card.  I would be happy for it to be incorporated into the 2.4 Kernel.  We
don't use sethdlc, we have our own configuration utility.

	We are finding that some distro's are now incorporating the patch
anyway (Mandrake for example), and some of our customers are getting
confused when the patch doesn't install cleanly because it is already there.
Especially if the customer doesn't understand patch anyway and is just
following install instructions.

	What 2.4 version would you aim for?


Kevin Curtis
Linux Development
FarSite Communications Ltd
kevin.curtis@farsite.co.uk
tel:   +44 1256 330461
fax:  +44 1256 854931
http://www.farsite.co.uk


-----Original Message-----
From: Krzysztof Halasa [mailto:khc@pm.waw.pl]
Sent: 19 September 2002 14:33
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alan Cox; Jeff Garzik; Francois Romieu; henrique@cyclades.com
Subject: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?


Hi,

The question is probably aimed mainly at people maintaining 2.4 Linux
and/or networking, but I'd like to see an opinion of other users/
developers as well.

What do you think about updating the 2.4 generic HDLC layer to the
newer 2.5 code?

Facts:
- it would break all sethdlc compatibility, users would be required to
  get 2.5 sethdlc.c and recompile it. There are even cosmetic sethdlc
  syntax changes and additions (sethdlc is a configuration tool).
- it would make it possible to support new boards like Cyclades PC300
  (not only this one).
- drivers which are in current 2.4 include Moxa C101 and RISCom/N2,
  which are older ISA cards. Most of their users currently use 2.5
  generic HDLC (a patch) with 2.4 kernels anyway.
- the other driver affected is DSCC4, but I know exactly nothing about
  it (a 2.5 version of it is, of course, available). What do you think,
  Francois?

The update, if any, wouldn't take place yet. I would expect it to happen
after some remaining questions regarding 2.5 code are resolved - chances
are there will be small changes to 2.5 generic HDLC interface first.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
Network Administrator
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?

[henrique]

Hello !!!

As Kevin, we also use the generic HDLC by patch. Moreover the PC300 driver is 
a patch too (it was oficially patched to the kernel just in the 2.5 serie). 
It would very good to have the new generic HDLC in the kernel 2.4 as most of 
our customers uses the 2.4 serie and most of them have no idea what is a 
patch. I don't see problems with the configuration utility because our 
customers install it from the sources provided by us and it is just a matter 
of change the sources.

kind regards
---
Henrique Gobbi
Software Engineer
+55 11 50333339
Cyclades Corporation

On Friday 20 September 2002 03:18 pm, Kevin Curtis wrote:
> Hi,
> 	we use the generic HDLC module (by patch) in 2.4 with our FarSync
> card.  I would be happy for it to be incorporated into the 2.4 Kernel.  We
> don't use sethdlc, we have our own configuration utility.
>
> 	We are finding that some distro's are now incorporating the patch
> anyway (Mandrake for example), and some of our customers are getting
> confused when the patch doesn't install cleanly because it is already
> there. Especially if the customer doesn't understand patch anyway and is
> just following install instructions.
>
> 	What 2.4 version would you aim for?
>
>
> Kevin Curtis
> Linux Development
> FarSite Communications Ltd
> kevin.curtis@farsite.co.uk
> tel:   +44 1256 330461
> fax:  +44 1256 854931
> http://www.farsite.co.uk
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Halasa [mailto:khc@pm.waw.pl]
> Sent: 19 September 2002 14:33
> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Alan Cox; Jeff Garzik; Francois Romieu; henrique@cyclades.com
> Subject: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> The question is probably aimed mainly at people maintaining 2.4 Linux
> and/or networking, but I'd like to see an opinion of other users/
> developers as well.
>
> What do you think about updating the 2.4 generic HDLC layer to the
> newer 2.5 code?
>
> Facts:
> - it would break all sethdlc compatibility, users would be required to
>   get 2.5 sethdlc.c and recompile it. There are even cosmetic sethdlc
>   syntax changes and additions (sethdlc is a configuration tool).
> - it would make it possible to support new boards like Cyclades PC300
>   (not only this one).
> - drivers which are in current 2.4 include Moxa C101 and RISCom/N2,
>   which are older ISA cards. Most of their users currently use 2.5
>   generic HDLC (a patch) with 2.4 kernels anyway.
> - the other driver affected is DSCC4, but I know exactly nothing about
>   it (a 2.5 version of it is, of course, available). What do you think,
>   Francois?
>
> The update, if any, wouldn't take place yet. I would expect it to happen
> after some remaining questions regarding 2.5 code are resolved - chances
> are there will be small changes to 2.5 generic HDLC interface first.

-- 

Re: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?

[Krzysztof Halasa]

Kevin Curtis <kevin.curtis@farsite.co.uk> writes:

> 	We are finding that some distro's are now incorporating the patch
> anyway (Mandrake for example), and some of our customers are getting
> confused when the patch doesn't install cleanly because it is already there.
> Especially if the customer doesn't understand patch anyway and is just
> following install instructions.

Looks like I need to check some distro kernels, I wasn't aware of that.

> 	What 2.4 version would you aim for?

I expect I need a month for making sure 2.5 interface is the one I want.
And I would rather start with early pre- versions of a particular 2.4 kernel.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
Network Administrator

2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?

[Krzysztof Halasa]

Hi,

The question is probably aimed mainly at people maintaining 2.4 Linux
and/or networking, but I'd like to see an opinion of other users/
developers as well.

What do you think about updating the 2.4 generic HDLC layer to the
newer 2.5 code?

Facts:
- it would break all sethdlc compatibility, users would be required to
  get 2.5 sethdlc.c and recompile it. There are even cosmetic sethdlc
  syntax changes and additions (sethdlc is a configuration tool).
- it would make it possible to support new boards like Cyclades PC300
  (not only this one).
- drivers which are in current 2.4 include Moxa C101 and RISCom/N2,
  which are older ISA cards. Most of their users currently use 2.5
  generic HDLC (a patch) with 2.4 kernels anyway.
- the other driver affected is DSCC4, but I know exactly nothing about
  it (a 2.5 version of it is, of course, available). What do you think,
  Francois?

The update, if any, wouldn't take place yet. I would expect it to happen
after some remaining questions regarding 2.5 code are resolved - chances
are there will be small changes to 2.5 generic HDLC interface first.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
Network Administrator

Re: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas?

[Francois Romieu]

Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> :
[...]
> - the other driver affected is DSCC4, but I know exactly nothing about
>   it (a 2.5 version of it is, of course, available). What do you think,
>   Francois?

dscc4 maintainer:
I use a code marrying the core 2.4.x dscc4 with a 2.5.x hdlc to test 2.5.x
dscc4. Thus no real extra load. Hdlc glue in current 2.4.x dscc4 does its 
job but I wouldn't recommend it as a model for the newer generation.

dscc4 users:
Migration from specific scctool.c + sethdlc to single sethdlc. Definitely
a simpler life.

If users damn me, I'll surely meet someone from Infineon in hell to discuss
dscc4 :o)

vendors:
- dscc4 not included in rh 2.4 last time I looked at it (I labelled it
  'EXPERIMENTAL');
- 2.4.18 mdk kills it using Krzysztof's post-2.4-didn't-make-2.5 (!) hdlc;
- don't know what the others do.

Imho dscc4 doesn't need to be taken too much in consideration regarding
2.4.x hdlc stack change.

-- 
Ueimor