From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934664AbdBQPno (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2017 10:43:44 -0500 Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([62.4.15.54]:43480 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933900AbdBQPnn (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2017 10:43:43 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:43:41 +0100 From: Maxime Ripard To: Tobias Jakobi Cc: ML dri-devel , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , wens@csie.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] ARM: sun8i: a33: Mali improvements Message-ID: <20170217154341.vn7uqvdaijtrj64s@lukather> References: <10fd28cb-269a-ec38-ecfb-b7c86be3e716@math.uni-bielefeld.de> <20170216184524.cxcy2ux37yrwutla@lukather> <2cecfc48-576f-3888-08aa-1fe2edc3c752@math.uni-bielefeld.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7wd4bnkoxq5lsnle" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2cecfc48-576f-3888-08aa-1fe2edc3c752@math.uni-bielefeld.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-08-21) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --7wd4bnkoxq5lsnle Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 01:45:44PM +0100, Tobias Jakobi wrote: > Hello Maxime, >=20 > Maxime Ripard wrote: > > Hi, > >=20 > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 01:43:06PM +0100, Tobias Jakobi wrote: > >> I was wondering about the following. Wasn't there some strict > >> requirement about code going upstream, which also included that there > >> was a full open-source driver stack for it? > >> > >> I don't see how this is the case for Mali, neither in the kernel, nor = in > >> userspace. I'm aware that the Mali kernel driver is open-source. But it > >> is not upstream, maintained out of tree, and won't land upstream in its > >> current form (no resemblence to a DRM driver at all). And let's not ta= lk > >> about the userspace part. > >> > >> So, why should this be here? > >=20 > > The device tree is a representation of the hardware itself. The state > > of the driver support doesn't change the hardware you're running on, > > just like your BIOS/UEFI on x86 won't change the device it reports to > > Linux based on whether it has a driver for it. > > Like Emil already said, the new bindings and the DT entries are solely > introduced to support a proprietary out-of-tree module. No. This new binding and the DT entries are solely introduced to describe a device found in a number of SoCs, just like any other DT binding we have. > The current workflow when introducing new DT entries is the following: > - upstream a driver that uses the entries > - THEN add the new entries And that's never been the preferred workflow, for *any* patches. Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com --7wd4bnkoxq5lsnle Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYpxopAAoJEBx+YmzsjxAgRAEQAIFTvLi6XXzNqh43UxsBUkKX XUg7LN/oZiG8UKmk9Q0mDSaygiGpO3kZF4wQIjakrKPzGRhxfhDahrKvDXVja3dq jit06bhZDqFi33EgevOodIdTidvxaI4juisv6eNthYaBZ6i3qH5HeTmqEYMjCCNl ehY4yEwq4N/nSXlTgMz8tFZS/7T0E4L1/Cm4fHPoBcVORdIgFEjQm/ROwkK0r6TF gFzOodC0qEKrR5zrMtWLyXDrqLu64DQYGSEFC6KiyXGE8pnBXs228IAjSsqetPgF Xlh6pTO+XtJs4IXVX0BgzLlkZAWm0rLlJyCzC37IAy7tnk9mP/5LAWBxc029PhYI LcXDuw9xjyn5Y+vqzqfdRm3eQTvQcY0z0oODI3W6h6HXAKLsA1vvTKJgapO5eQIH eIcZDjDmbq+EKu95aBfN+pV0GL1v8ByZmibYxubZpU6mfAcdb/MO5WlUvZPybMJI RhDm7ZeiPqK2EnyYkcc+1iQK5Xvp4C/Q3POcXecCBKKGgNfiImmyv1pHIkKoUFuO jxOeCaNcD4o8G4mqrP0YGoyFbap1Pi1+nFRktu742HXkPQqPIJP1KToUq3cnTilG j+1JIeqWiZNZTYx2f9Vwwrjv/INX920v2gLSnTHEhIRT61/rV6UjYtwILZ60TUmf itic3SYwoNabfD+iENcW =4SNx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7wd4bnkoxq5lsnle--