Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] arm64: Kconfig: Update ARCH_EXYNOS select configs

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 30/09/2021 14:10, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> 2021年9月30日(木) 20:51 Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> On Thu, 30 Sep 2021, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>
>>
>> Is that the same as exporting symbols to framework APIs?
>>
>> Since this is already a method GKI uses to allow external modules to
>> interact with the core kernel/frameworks.  However, it's not possible
>> to upstream these without an upstream user for each one.
> 
> Not necessary the core frameworks, could also be changing the ways the
> existing drivers register to allow additional drivers to extend the
> functionality rather than completely overwrite them. 

Yes, the first user could be within the kernel after modifying some of
the drivers.

> It's really hard
> to tell what the right way would be without knowing the exact things
> they find missing in the upstream drivers. As for upstream users, this
> is exactly the point - upstream is a bidirectional effort, one takes
> from it and should contribute things back.
> 
> Generally, the subsystems being mentioned here are so basic (clock,
> pinctrl, rtc), that I really can't imagine what kind of rocket science
> one might want to hide for competitive reasons... If it's for an
> entire SoC, I wonder why Intel and AMD don't have similar concerns and
> contribute support for their newest hardware far before the release.

Lee used the argument of not-disclosing-edge-hw but I also don't see
much of it in the case of few drivers needed to be overridden. Just
bunch of registers for the same stuff we have sine 8 years. Rather the
vendor does not want to commit effort towards upstreaming these...


Best regards,
Krzysztof