On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:03:58AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 10:52:58AM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 16:55 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:53:01PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in > > > > drivers/staging/Kconfig between commit d0146d396bfa ("tcm_vhost: Initial > > > > merge for vhost level target fabric driver") from the target-merge tree > > > > and commit 15a4bc17b7f4 ("Staging: add CSR Wifi "os helper" module") from > > > > the staging tree. > > > > > > > > Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as > > > > necessary. > > > > -- > > > > Cheers, > > > > Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > diff --cc drivers/staging/Kconfig > > > > index 67ec9fe,e3402d5..0000000 > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/Kconfig > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/Kconfig > > > > @@@ -132,6 -132,8 +132,10 @@@ source "drivers/staging/ipack/Kconfig > > > > > > > > source "drivers/staging/gdm72xx/Kconfig" > > > > > > > > + source "drivers/staging/csr/Kconfig" > > > > + > > > > + source "drivers/staging/omap-thermal/Kconfig" > > > > + > > > > +source "drivers/vhost/Kconfig.tcm" > > > > > > Why is someone putting a non drivers/staging/ Kconfig file here in > > > drivers/staging/Kconfig? That's not ok at all. > > > > > > Target people, please just depend on CONFIG_STAGING if you want to do > > > that, but don't mess with files in the drivers/staging/ directory for no > > > good reason at all. > > > > > > > This was a request from MST (CC'ed) in order to have TCM_VHOST show up > > under the staging configuration options.. > > If you really want it to show up there, then send me a patch adding the > code to drivers/staging/. Otherwise it really makes no sense. > > > If that's really not what should be done, I'm happy to drop this part > > and just use CONFIG_STAGING again. > > Why are you wanting to depend on CONFIG_STAGING in the first place? > What is wrong with the code that it can't be merged "properly" now? > Don't use CONFIG_STAGING as a "crutch" unless you really need it. > > thanks, > > greg k-h It's very similar to how it was with nouveau: we are not sure we can commit to the userspace ABI yet. Most importantly, it still seems not 100% clear whether this driver will have major userspace using it. And if not, it would be very hard to support a driver when recent userspace does not use it in the end. At the moment arguments on upstream mailing list seem to be a bit circular: there's no module in upstream kernel so userspace does not want to accept the patches. If we put enabling this driver in staging, then it works out in one of two ways - userspace starts using it then this effectively freezes the ABI and we move it out of staging next release - no userspace uses it and we drop it completely or rework ABI On the other hand, it is marginally better to not want code in staging for two reasons: - there are dependencies between this code and other code in drivers/vhost which are easier for me to handle if it's all in one place - a bit easier to track history if we do not move code What do you think? -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html