Hi, 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 talk > about the userspace part. > > So, why should this be here? 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. So yes, unfortunately, we don't have a driver upstream at the moment. But that doesn't prevent us from describing the hardware accurately. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
