> From: Felipe Contreras [mailto:felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 10:03 AM > > In this case a tree is just like a branch. We have done some new > development outside on this branch to enable a new dma mode to boost > performance. Hopefully that will be folded back in before too much time. > I think I've seen a patch even. In the past we would have just 2x the > performance on some old kernel and made it available. But probably so > out of phase you really had to work to get it. Today using a current > tree it is there and there is a lot better chance we or some community > person will push it back. I agree with the way you have put this. Ideally short branches from a central root would be best. Part of the challenge here is we would have worked for over a year before chip specifications are releasable. Having a way to absorb the functional parts of that time is something not easily done. That is not to say we have done it in the best or only way. It is not always completely done for that matter. For the legacy drivers or new simple ones keeping in sync or resync'ing makes sense. It is always the right answer. For long lead time things like ISP-camera, bridge, display, power its really hard. Each of those systems takes a multi-year focus just to get it working with most functionality. There really isn't a short cut for some of these. In these areas there usually is someone willing to jump in with their own reasons. But unless they really are capable, supported and willing to devote 1.5 years chances are they can not deliver. There is a real danger of never getting it done. Regards, Richard W. ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�������ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
