On Monday 20 December 2010 19:07:30 Jerome Glisse wrote: > > I also do not think that it is at all kernel policy to disallow kernel > > drivers which do not have opensource userspace components. In fact, > > Linus Torvalds begs to differ on this matter. The fact of the matter > > is that the driver lives now, Qualcomm have it in their upstream, > > Freescale have it in their upstream, Linaro are going to fetch from > > that. It doesn't need to go all the way to stable, because people can > > compile their own kernels if they want (and Linaro is there provide > > the source to do that with the best interoperability with the silicon > > vendors' chips as possible). > > I was just expressing my opinion on upstream, if i see this driver > showing up on lkml i will reply with a nak and explain why (pretty > much same argument as here). I don't have any authority on linux > kernel but as far as i understand it, it's about reviewing what's gets > in, so i hope my review opinion would matter (what ever the out come > is). There is a broad agreement on disallowing new kernel to userspace interfaces in the upstream kernel unless there is an application using it that is both open source and considered useful. I don't think Linaro as a group takes a position or should take a position on closed source user space at all -- we just don't need to bother with it because we have enough work to do on free components. However, we have a policy on kernel code and that is as I mentioned before that we don't take code unless it's about to go upstream. In this case, upstream doesn't take the driver, so Linaro won't either. Arnd _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
