On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 08:28:16AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > > > > I definitely don't want that we don't attempt this. But brought from years > > of experience, I recommend to merge first (with pre-refactoring already > > applied, but helpers only extracted, not yet at the right spot), and then > > follow up with. Because on average, there's way too many trees with > > overloaded maintainers who maybe look at your patch once per kernel > > release cycle. > > > > If you know that backlight and spi isn't one of these areas (anything that > > goes through takashi/sound is a similar good experience for us on the i915 > > side), then I guess we can try. But then Noralf has already written a few > > months worth of really great refactoring, and I'm seriously starting to > > feel guilty for volunteering him for all of this. Even though he seems to > > be really good at it, and seems to not mind, it's getting a bit silly. > > Given that I'd say up to Noralf. > > > > In short, there's always a balance. > > I don't think we can make a rule for this, it will always depend on the > code. There is always going to be stuff we put in drm that should go > elsewhere, and stuff that is elsewhere that drm should use. > > I think however if we do add stuff like this, someone should keep track > of them and try to make them get further into the kernel. Yes, I think having some sort of TODO in drivers/gpu/drm could help track things that we know should eventually be moved out. It could serve as a list of janitorial tasks for newcomers that want to get their hands dirty and tackle relatively trivial tasks. That's not meant to devalue such contributions. Code would be in a mostly finished form, so it'd be mostly about moving things into the correct subsystem, interacting with maintainers, making sure things are kept working along the way, that kind of thing. No in-depth knowledge of DRM/KMS would be required, but perhaps be picked up along the way. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
