Re: [Intel-xe] [PATCH] drm/doc/rfc/xe: No STAGING in drm.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 03:57:12PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
We are not using the STAGING inside drm and the uAPI needs to be
in the acceptable form before we get merged upstream.

Is this a change from i915, where the force_probe protection is sufficient?

The email exchange with Greg KH  highlighted that the use of STAGING
outside of staging dir doesn't really produce the desired effect*.
Would it be sufficient to taint the kernel with bit 10 or
create a dedicated taint for this case?

Lucas De Marchi

* The logic for adding the taint is in the module load code and is
  triggered for modules with MODULE_INFO(staging), automatically
  added by modpost for modules under drivers/staging


Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/2023051029-overspend-sherry-1b85@gregkh/
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: Oded Gabbay <ogabbay@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Francois Dugast <francois.dugast@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Luis Strano <luis.strano@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst | 7 ++-----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
index 2516fe141db6..8524095a54bd 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
@@ -67,11 +67,8 @@ platforms.

When the time comes for Xe, the protection will be lifted on Xe and kept in i915.

-Xe driver will be protected with both STAGING Kconfig and force_probe. Changes in
-the uAPI are expected while the driver is behind these protections. STAGING will
-be removed when the driver uAPI gets to a mature state where we can guarantee the
-‘no regression’ rule. Then force_probe will be lifted only for future platforms
-that will be productized with Xe driver, but not with i915.
+Xe driver will be protected with force_probe, which will be lifted only for
+future platforms that will be productized with Xe driver, but not with i915.

Xe – Pre-Merge Goals
====================
--
2.39.2




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux