From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752696AbbIPStF (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:49:05 -0400 Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org ([131.252.210.177]:42829 "EHLO gabe.freedesktop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751689AbbIPStC (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:49:02 -0400 From: Eric Anholt To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Noralf =?utf-8?Q?Tr=C3=B8nnes?= , tglx@linutronix.de, jason@lakedaemon.net, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip: bcm2835: Add FIQ support In-Reply-To: <20150916162157.GB21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1434130016-26574-1-git-send-email-noralf@tronnes.org> <87d1zj6fq2.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> <55F5CD80.3020700@tronnes.org> <20150914090853.GF21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <87wpvtjcka.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> <20150914143459.GN21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <87613a31jb.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> <20150916162157.GB21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.20.2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:48:57 -0400 Message-ID: <87si6e9p46.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Russell King - ARM Linux writes: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:02:32AM -0400, Eric Anholt wrote: >> Russell King - ARM Linux writes: >>=20 >> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:33:09AM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote: >> >> So, while FIQ isn't used in upstream, I think it's worthwhile to merg= e. >> >> It is another step to bringing the downstream developers into the fol= d. >> > >> > I want to see the code _first_. Until then, I'm sorry, this patch can= 't >> > go in. >>=20 >> If you just want to see "Yes, GPL-compatible code using this is >> available", then that is: > > It's got nothing to do with "GPL-compatible code". I want to audit > _all_ code that makes use of FIQ. It disgusts me that you're trying > to dress this up as a licensing issue. It isn't. > >> https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/blob/rpi-4.1.y/drivers/usb/host/dwc= _otg/dwc_otg_fiq_stub.S >> https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/blob/rpi-4.1.y/drivers/usb/host/dwc= _otg/dwc_otg_fiq_fsm.c >>=20 >> If not, I'm curious what exactly is the reason the patch can't go in. > > In any case, I'm not going to say yes to code which provides a new > internal kernel facility for mainline kernels, but with no mainline > kernel users. Such code can only be to make external tree maintanence > easlier, but it has the unintended effect of making mainline kernel > maintanence harder. > > Such facilities _should_ always come with a user of that new facility. > > It's nothing personal, it's sane policy from experience. I've had stuff > like this in the past, where people have sent new facilities without any > users, years have gone by without that facility being used. The facility > has eventually been removed from the mainline kernel _because_ it doesn't > have any users. > > Moreover, there are people who audit the kernel looking for facilities > which have no users and propose patches to remove them. > > So, if you want some new facility to be merged into mainline kernels, > and for it to remain in the kernel, always accompany it with a user. Thanks, this was all I needed. In the subsystem I work in, the rule has been "You need to have open userspace using the thing that you can show", but obviously you only get to merge the user once the core stuff is done. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJV+bmZAAoJELXWKTbR/J7oOBsQAIhSD1YlOMusC/Ebu1lOBo7E kh93E6M0nkQy9CwHQw6RGUx2ugooMvDN+sutesOZ2MA+25ykk5Tsx2nnIllFEOSk 5UA4EE+1oozhdWfU/X5bNsmp7NcYE5kdL+N/gjhNe+oW5/bniX2TdSPh9F0k5cs6 RMcM+mpBzr/jKtHJX0C2mWMS+JUwQCANlOXFV7YxUtA/qM4vSoovwnZMuFHZqNJj gW8NKk/WCHaI0ijazUG5KBvImfxMHgQE8OFrmKvwyJL+rk2NbyxJIKh8RsPDexBl kxxx5Xm1q9KMcQE+X6e4zmEyH6mt2DiP9JF18mEP75MRPmF3s8xaShtVYZvDBiXL 2YuOLzPMBpvZjyubSjt8oSM5BJQclLHZin4nmOZz3bC7UyKFDoGI1qzjKvyaILjt BlD9xQqyGG4JODBLXVXw+Dh219YeUKKPAUmlRHmxpJHTA0jEY/g90Jd439LDTJp9 r2T0ThhvHx18Q1qCVuT9eFYujvWyMiX0k4HEALmXeHnbrr7cdCzpb2QrlNuI3lvm HDcMl9C1/W7dToVGemVkJeGSNDJ72DtVGbbjmNEOcnrAL2K9K+VNwY4rkgQ/zYSv gyIRzqEIT7QEuBh5HQoiqfS6KL+nDTInPMCN67rlT03LJULIh/xNzW12WRst2Z0j 2ua3C1cFbThrPWGdp4x7 =IGKa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: eric@anholt.net (Eric Anholt) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:48:57 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] irqchip: bcm2835: Add FIQ support In-Reply-To: <20150916162157.GB21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1434130016-26574-1-git-send-email-noralf@tronnes.org> <87d1zj6fq2.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> <55F5CD80.3020700@tronnes.org> <20150914090853.GF21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <87wpvtjcka.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> <20150914143459.GN21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <87613a31jb.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> <20150916162157.GB21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <87si6e9p46.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Russell King - ARM Linux writes: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:02:32AM -0400, Eric Anholt wrote: >> Russell King - ARM Linux writes: >> >> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:33:09AM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote: >> >> So, while FIQ isn't used in upstream, I think it's worthwhile to merge. >> >> It is another step to bringing the downstream developers into the fold. >> > >> > I want to see the code _first_. Until then, I'm sorry, this patch can't >> > go in. >> >> If you just want to see "Yes, GPL-compatible code using this is >> available", then that is: > > It's got nothing to do with "GPL-compatible code". I want to audit > _all_ code that makes use of FIQ. It disgusts me that you're trying > to dress this up as a licensing issue. It isn't. > >> https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/blob/rpi-4.1.y/drivers/usb/host/dwc_otg/dwc_otg_fiq_stub.S >> https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/blob/rpi-4.1.y/drivers/usb/host/dwc_otg/dwc_otg_fiq_fsm.c >> >> If not, I'm curious what exactly is the reason the patch can't go in. > > In any case, I'm not going to say yes to code which provides a new > internal kernel facility for mainline kernels, but with no mainline > kernel users. Such code can only be to make external tree maintanence > easlier, but it has the unintended effect of making mainline kernel > maintanence harder. > > Such facilities _should_ always come with a user of that new facility. > > It's nothing personal, it's sane policy from experience. I've had stuff > like this in the past, where people have sent new facilities without any > users, years have gone by without that facility being used. The facility > has eventually been removed from the mainline kernel _because_ it doesn't > have any users. > > Moreover, there are people who audit the kernel looking for facilities > which have no users and propose patches to remove them. > > So, if you want some new facility to be merged into mainline kernels, > and for it to remain in the kernel, always accompany it with a user. Thanks, this was all I needed. In the subsystem I work in, the rule has been "You need to have open userspace using the thing that you can show", but obviously you only get to merge the user once the core stuff is done. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 818 bytes Desc: not available URL: