From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=stwcx.xyz (client-ip=64.147.123.25; helo=wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=patrick@stwcx.xyz; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=stwcx.xyz Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=stwcx.xyz header.i=@stwcx.xyz header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=QWc8LHPA; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=U+zvRV3W; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Bjjv46DcQzDqlR for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2020 02:34:39 +1000 (AEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6975A64; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 12:34:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 04 Sep 2020 12:34:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stwcx.xyz; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm2; bh=t6b7g54ut622LwLECR1kn1WnA88 y8JFVsbY9FhZrd94=; b=QWc8LHPAForXNkgCOUCLWbe+hnPNls3wSfZcvcjRGSZ QWDvX6tgFg22NVP3JewS7r7ZtIcfzrcSTZtplhK+/gCUyfcQP2fs/0XZE45gXrvv +poGBhX1tZSKD2WlS/WFHdCMgFjBhwA2YhfOizEirRkUiV273VEaP8v/030KrL+M or3AuUmj1EI8wAiLmPjIWU0hzaElNRiyVx5v1FfMzoM75AFeHAosNOMuxCjfE0az UJk1JWO5zwjH/vjp/Fc8AiVjkHdjpDX8OANV18v5xqzX63C3vh8IC4qev+Ca4y+2 ZO8gLlGLzEfIkgcqvD34cS3ZdRe6NHrjtRaV++Kvwzg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=t6b7g5 4ut622LwLECR1kn1WnA88y8JFVsbY9FhZrd94=; b=U+zvRV3W/CaRVae6LLx5Y1 xTfnbWDaUuZ7qyKC64vSC54QEyioQ86Ecek8Ye60nIItOEMHO40iUBCuVSXZksph P5cbpe9PVivqjWAud/muy6QCQKqkBSOrYeVuaQ+A50PhKbuT6xk21d92jgJEnrhE IMIPhol8aeVtqb+D9x29lLHg95/o0qmYgaVEvMZnVeR0/pa5HbqUQv0GhLzfJivE 4gferVaydrlc/KRCAkr10dhXnp1uvg1ci9zYnMxfnD7HRLRdr2PLPesC3WhpBauS 2qWw9izXK24rbl613M7KJ/Hk2V5QFncwIJm5N6vxV553Ue0aYe7ahGhUAVDrlJHA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrudegfedguddtgecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enfghrlhcuvffnffculdefhedmnecujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredt tddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrrghtrhhitghkucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehprghtrhhitghkse hsthiftgigrdighiiiqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedvfeelkedtleejhfeitdduhfev iedujeelheektefgieefiedtjeegvdeggfffffenucffohhmrghinhepohiilhgrsghsrd horhhgnecukfhppeejiedrvdehtddrkeegrddvfeeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgep tdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgrthhrihgtkhesshhtfigtgidrgiihii X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (76-250-84-236.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [76.250.84.236]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D9C10306005C; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 12:34:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 11:34:30 -0500 From: Patrick Williams To: Vernon Mauery Cc: "Mihm, James" , OpenBMC Maillist Subject: Re: PECI patchset status Message-ID: <20200904163430.GA3532@heinlein> References: <20200903152753.GA57949@patrickw3-mbp.lan.stwcx.xyz> <20200903171556.GA32795@mauery.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="q5wOvoHkaccQRDme" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200903171556.GA32795@mauery.jf.intel.com> X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2020 16:34:46 -0000 --q5wOvoHkaccQRDme Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 10:15:56AM -0700, Vernon Mauery wrote: > On 03-Sep-2020 10:27 AM, Patrick Williams wrote: > >On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 05:57:48AM +0000, Mihm, James wrote: > >Rather than create a separate fork of the kernel, is there something > >that could be done here to have someone from Intel work with Joel on > >preparing the patches? When a new kernel comes out, Joel can ensure it > >works on the base AST2xxx system design and before we move all the > >systems to it, someone from Intel can rebase the non-upstreamed patches > >they are carrying? This hopefully reduces some of the burden on Joel > >and stops us from further fragmenting the community. >=20 > Keep in mind that Intel does not plan to keep the fork around=20 > indefinitely. The hope is to fully upstream all of the patches that we=20 > have outstanding. Our intention is not to fragment the community, but to= =20 > provide a mechanism to continue to move forward while still providing a= =20 > way for other users to build the intel-platforms target. >=20 > As an added feature, having our full kernel source in a publicly=20 > available tree will allow us to upstream more features that depend on=20 > kernel support that is not currently available. I'm not really following this last paragraph. I suppose you're saying that you have kernel changes that are not in openbmc/linux that add additional features? Why aren't they in openbmc/linux? I thought there was a process for getting code in that isn't quite ready for upstreaming, as long as there is progress towards that? Is there some list of what these features are and what the upstreaming state is, because this original thread was about PECI, but you're implying there is much more. If the process isn't working for the community shouldn't we discuss improving that to something that does work? It seems like your team has decided to go to the nuclear option of forking after Joel has proposed dropping a patchset that he's been carrying for three months short of three years. Joel does great work of keeping the kernel up to date, both on a major release and picking up supplemental fixes. Is Intel committing to this same level of support that Joel is currently providing for your own fork? Past performance doesn't really give me a lot of confidence that this will be a short-term fork. In December 2019, Joel raised this exact same problem with the PECI driver[1] and it was promised that there would be forward progress "within a week"[2]. One week later, there was a v11 of the patches posted[3] and we got some good comments from a variety of upstream maintainers. Since then, there has been zero activity. Shouldn't we have seen a v12 pretty quickly after that? 1. https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/2019-December/019684.html 2. https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/2019-December/019728.html 3. https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/2019-December/019823.html --=20 Patrick Williams --q5wOvoHkaccQRDme Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEBGD9ii4LE9cNbqJBqwNHzC0AwRkFAl9SbJQACgkQqwNHzC0A wRlBXA//YQhJ0/9LXPNmV+dEUoAiGKCcF1N/RW0yNpfWd3yKVrBaS1FDfaTNZqTD 2iXfCED3Qh33LCy696mWoi4y1cQYYcqzfggnNacrmiuXKEvKF76aXOZ2IUzHO1Um O0btO5mMLvcw5lp9pzjSOoUjwXqcvEb6xWJ8MngIp6RpPhY1sipm0geoQf/yxNvr iNWEAA15RKq6g9bkNFU5TwSQKJT7zuoaonOlMEufGRYXZ3q3lhHpm3BOXvkwxtci eHz8q2PdJKYwzHv7Rzi2auYsNqvbFGX4ytEF25IyHrg51iPsLpNkqA3kDDdiYL6r z7BQa7AdIHQK312RwBxHMmMz6m87LBMT2Bm96tyzGfdkC+0eyxMYx+gb+TjYiKsP bUcuTauORrAfne3zq/QCPBtn1L39RcxHfVop27uWwSytrSnnbFMdFe+9ZpZ6STjR MFKsyLQPPati9etRhJbSEW+r2d8FwnFMJm/PdlRkFafR/vrRjeQ6ZT912eUP3tN5 0WM7Q+/A+VpmVZJpbcxtYbcg5Oo1vAx0fxJKTe7mMbI/w3s7COtozEROR6f99RkO AuxI4qoHlmV3JXJnPDpuuiEqA7TAoP3wxI+oYsjTQ06uHY3FIKDLFWRuCt2w0ryA rVzYxLr42ve7Zmo7CljroSxQTgp0WahD/P0Z0KmDy3bPsc28yUg= =00xW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --q5wOvoHkaccQRDme--