On 05.05.2015 20:28, Harald Hoyer wrote: > On 05.05.2015 19:50, Josh Boyer wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Harald and I were recently talking about kdbus and how it plays into >> Fedora. Right now, the kernel-playground COPR is carrying the kdbus >> patches, but that isn't widely used and isn't included in a broad test >> base. Obviously our distribution is heavily entwined with D-Bus and we >> were looking to see if it was possible to help kdbus testing and >> development by doing some kind of integration within Fedora itself. I >> promised Harald I would talk it over with the other Fedora kernel >> maintainers and after a brief discussion we came up with the following >> possible proposal. >> >> If Fedora were to carry kdbus in any form, the following things would >> be required: >> >> 1) There would be a single canonical location to track kdbus >> development. After talking with Harald, that should be the upstream >> tree that gregkh is using to submit patches. >> >> 2) Harald's team (systemd, etc) would commit to testing the system >> both with and without kdbus active. Obviously we do not want to >> enforce reliance on something as core critical as kdbus while it is >> still being actively developed upstream. That could cause a lot of >> deviation down the road and it isn't the aim here. >> >> 3) kdbus would only be carried in the rawhide branch until it is >> merged upstream. As a concrete example, if kdbus was not merged in >> the upstream kernel at the time rel-eng creates the F23 branches, then >> Fedora 23 will never get kdbus. It will be carried in rawhide and >> rawhide only until it's accepted upstream. The maintainers actually >> hope this does get merged but we want to make sure we are prepared to >> drop this without causing too much trouble if needed. >> >> 4) After discussing a bit with the rest of the Fedora kernel >> maintainers, we would carry an additional patch that would require >> 'kdbus-enabled' to be specified before the kernel would allow kdbus to >> be loaded (or similar mechanism). This would focus the main testing >> effort for all the default images to remain as they are today, while >> easily allowing the plumbing layer developers access to kdbus for >> their enablement testing. >> >> These conditions would hopefully help the Fedora kernel maintainers >> avoid some of the pitfalls of carrying a large chunk of out of tree >> code and if they're all met we feel fairly comfortable with doing >> this. We wanted to send this out for a bit wider discussion and >> review before proceeding with it, and I agreed to start this thread so >> here we are. >> >> Harald, does the above look like what you were envisioning when we >> talked earlier? >> >> josh >> > > Looks very good except for point 4, where we wanted to enable kdbus by default > and have a "kdbus=0" command line option. > > CC'ing the kdbus folks... > btw, currently the kdbus module is only loaded by systemd, if you specify "kdbus" on the kernel command line. _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
