On 30/09/2021 14:10, Tomasz Figa wrote:

2021年9月30日(木) 20:51 Lee Jones [off-list ref]:

quoted

On Thu, 30 Sep 2021, Tomasz Figa wrote:


Is that the same as exporting symbols to framework APIs?

Since this is already a method GKI uses to allow external modules to
interact with the core kernel/frameworks.  However, it's not possible
to upstream these without an upstream user for each one.

Not necessary the core frameworks, could also be changing the ways the
existing drivers register to allow additional drivers to extend the
functionality rather than completely overwrite them. 

Yes, the first user could be within the kernel after modifying some of
the drivers.

It's really hard
to tell what the right way would be without knowing the exact things
they find missing in the upstream drivers. As for upstream users, this
is exactly the point - upstream is a bidirectional effort, one takes
from it and should contribute things back.

Generally, the subsystems being mentioned here are so basic (clock,
pinctrl, rtc), that I really can't imagine what kind of rocket science
one might want to hide for competitive reasons... If it's for an
entire SoC, I wonder why Intel and AMD don't have similar concerns and
contribute support for their newest hardware far before the release.

Lee used the argument of not-disclosing-edge-hw but I also don't see
much of it in the case of few drivers needed to be overridden. Just
bunch of registers for the same stuff we have sine 8 years. Rather the
vendor does not want to commit effort towards upstreaming these...


Best regards,
Krzysztof

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel