On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 10:40:37AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Greg, I hope this will be good enough for you to merge this code. > > So we're officially going to use dri-devel for technical details review > and then Greg for merging so we don't have to deal with other merge > criteria dri-devel folks have? > > I don't expect anything less by now, but it does make the original claim > that drivers/misc will not step all over accelerators folks a complete > farce under the totally-not-a-gpu banner. > > This essentially means that for any other accelerator stack that doesn't > fit the dri-devel merge criteria, even if it's acting like a gpu and uses > other gpu driver stuff, you can just send it to Greg and it's good to go. > > There's quite a lot of these floating around actually (and many do have > semi-open runtimes, like habanalabs have now too, just not open enough to > be actually useful). It's going to be absolutely lovely having to explain > to these companies in background chats why habanalabs gets away with their > stack and they don't. FYI, I fully agree with Daniel here. Habanlabs needs to open up their runtime if they want to push any additional feature in the kernel. The current situation is not sustainable.
