Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Create kern folder for Linux kernel modules

["Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>]

> On Dec 22, 2017, at 5:38 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 
> 22/12/2017 11:04, Hemant Agrawal:
>> On 12/22/2017 2:13 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> 22/12/2017 06:57, Hemant Agrawal:
>>>> This patch moves the Linux kernel modules code to a common place.
>>>> - Separate the kernel module code from user space code.
>>>> - The GPL-2.0 licensed code is separated from the BSD-3 licensed userspace
>>>>   code
>>> 
>>> What is the benefit of separate things by license?
>> 
>> The separation makes it easy to identify and check the license.
>> 
>> Any patch introducing new file in *non-kern* folders shall not be 
>> GPL-2.0 licensed.  Or GPL-2.0 license is allowed only for kern folder.
> 
> The kernel modules are in DPDK only for historical reasons.
> We should get rid of them, and rely only on upstream modules.
> 
> And it should be allowed to have kernel-related files elsewhere.
> Examples: GPL tools or BPF code.
> 
>>> These modules are Linux modules, so they should be in the linuxapp dir.
>> 
>> 
>> This is a cleaner separation w.r.t userspace/kernel space code.
>> *kern* is a better placefolder for LKMs.
> 
> I prefer "kernel" name.

The name should be related to Linux in some way, like linux_kern or linux_kernel or linux_modules (this is the one I prefer) this way it make it clear which OS they are designed for.

> 
>> Also eal is not getting overloaded.
>> 
>> linuxapp is part of librte_eal.  KNI is not related to EAL, but still 
>> the kni kernel code is added to librte_eal under linuxapp.
> 
> Yes it makes sense.
> 
> More opinions/votes?
> 
>>> There are also some kernel modules in the bsdapp directory.
>> 
>> We can move them as well.

Regards,
Keith