> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 10:03 AM
> To: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>; Roman Kagan
> <[email protected]>; Radim Krčmář <[email protected]>; KY
> Srinivasan <[email protected]>; Vitaly Kuznetsov
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Denis V . Lunev
> <[email protected]>; Haiyang Zhang <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Ingo Molnar
> <[email protected]>; H. Peter Anvin <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] hyperv: move VMBus connection ids to uapi
> 
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 09:58:36 -0800
> Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 09:50:49AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > Lastly, there is licensing issues on headers. It would be good to have any
> > > userspace ABI headers licensed with a more liberal license so that BSD
> and DPDK drivers
> > > could use them directly. Right now each one reinvents.
> >
> > Microsoft could easily solves this problem by offering a suitably
> > liberally licensed header documenting the full HyperV guest protocol
> > that Linux and other projects could use.
> 
> The issue is if same header file mixes kernel and userspace API stuff.
> 
> Once the files are arranged right, I will submit trivial change to comments
> to indicate the liberal licensing of userspace API headers.

Let us take this one step at a time. I know for a fact that not all the guest 
host
protocols on Hyper-V are guaranteed to be stable. Some of the protocols are 
part of
the published MSFT standards such RNDIS and these obviously are guaranteed to be
stable. For the rest it is less clear. The fact that we need to ensure 
compatibility of existing
Windows guests tells me that any host side changes will be versioned and the 
hosts will always
support older guests.

I would like to minimize what we include in the uapi header; especially when 
MSFT has made no guarantees
with regards how  they may be evolved. I will also work on getting some clarity 
on both stability and
under what license we would expose the uapi header.

Regards,

K. Y
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Reply via email to