On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 01:44:41PM +0200, Terje Bergström wrote: > On 30.11.2012 10:50, Lucas Stach wrote: > > I'm with Thierry here. I think there is a fair chance that we won't get > > the API right from the start, even when trying to come up with something > > that sounds sane to everyone. It's also not desirable to delay gr2d > > going into mainline until we are all completely satisfied with the API. > > > > I also fail to see how host1x module being in the DRM directory hinders > > any downstream development. So I'm in favour of keeping host1x besides > > the other DRM components to lower the burden for API changes and move it > > out into some more generic directory, once we feel confident that the > > API is reasonable stable. > > host1x module being in DRM directory hinders using nvhost from anywhere > outside DRM in both upstream and downstream. That's not true. Nothing keeps the rest of the kernel from using an API exported by the tegra-drm driver. > I also don't like first putting the driver in one place, and then > moving it with a huge commit to another place. Hehe, you're doing exactly that in this patch series. =) > We'd just postpone exactly the problems that were indicated earlier: > we'd need to synchronize two trees to remove code in one and add in > another at the same time so that there wouldn't be conflicting host1x > drivers. I'd rather just add it in final place once, and be done with > it. Yes, there would be a certain amount of synchronization needed, but as Stephen correctly pointed out we could do that move through one tree with the Acked-by of the other maintainer. The point is that we need to do this once instead of everytime the API changes. > But if it's a make-it-or-brake-it for upstreaming, I can move it to be a > subdirectory under drivers/gpu/drm/tegra. Would this mean that we'd > modify the MAINTAINER's file so that the tegradrm entry excludes host1x > sub-directory, and I'd add another one which included only the host1x > sub-directory? The host1x part would be Supported, whereas rest of > tegradrm is Maintained. An entry for drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/host1x would override an entry for drivers/gpu/drm/tegra so no need to exclude it. That said, there's no way to exclude an subdirectory in MAINTAINERS that I know of. My main point for keeping host1x within tegra-drm for now was that it could possibly help speed up the inclusion of the host1x code. Seeing that there's still a substantial amount of work to be done and a need for discussion I'm not sure if rushing this is the best way. In that case there may be justification for putting it in a separate location from the start. Thierry
Attachment:
pgp_5cfURlOIf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
