On Thu, 30 Sep 2021, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 30/09/2021 14:39, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Sep 2021, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > >> On 30/09/2021 11:23, Lee Jones wrote: > >>> [0] Full disclosure: part of my role at Linaro is to keep the Android > >>> kernel running as close to Mainline as possible and encourage/push the > >>> upstream-first mantra, hence my involvement with this and other sets. > >>> I assure you all intentions are good and honourable. If you haven't > >>> already seen it, please see Todd's most recent update on the goals and > >>> status of GKI: > >>> > >>> Article: https://tinyurl.com/saaen3sp > >>> Video: https://youtu.be/O_lCFGinFPM > >>> > >> > >> Side topic, why this patchset is in your scope or Will's/Google's scope? > >> Just drop it from Android main kernel, it will not be your problem. I > >> mean, really, you don't need this patchset in your tree at all. The only > >> platform which needs it, the only platform which will loose something > >> will be one specific vendor. Therefore this will be an incentive for > >> them to join both discussions and upstream development. :) > > > > How would they fix this besides upstreaming support for unreleased > > work-in-progress H/W? > > > > Haven't I explained this several times already? :) > > Either that way or the same as Will's doing but that's not my question. > I understand you flush the queue of your GKI patches to be closer to > upstream. Reduce the backlog/burden. you can achieve your goal by simply > dropping such patch and making it not your problem. :) git reset --hard mainline/master # job done - tea break :) Seriously though, we wish to encourage the use of GKI so all vendors can enjoy the benefits of more easily updateable/secure code-bases. I can't see how pushing back on seamlessly benign changes would benefit them or anyone else. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
