From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 622403FC3 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 19:33:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cwcc.thunk.org (pool-72-74-133-215.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [72.74.133.215]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 17UJXT4m020247 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Aug 2021 15:33:30 -0400 Received: by cwcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id 8CFB515C3E7E; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 15:33:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 15:33:29 -0400 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: dave.bueso@gmail.com, daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com Cc: Laurent Pinchart , Linus Walleij , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, Jesse Barnes , Alex Levin Subject: Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 06:01:04PM -0700, Alex Levin wrote: > Thanks for the feedback Linus and Laurent. > > We are willing to extend this to 90 minutes and cover the > opportunities and challenges we have WRT to SoC manufacturers > upstreaming and how ChromeOS is influencing upstreaming. > > I wasn't sure we will be accepted as a ksummit so it seems that the > track for now is a MC, but that might change. I've added the Performance and Scalability MC runners to this thread. After taking a closer look at the proposal submitted to the Performance MC: https://linuxplumbersconf.org/event/11/abstracts/1042/ ... I noted that (a) the proposal wasn't about scalability in the traditional sense (e.g., how well does the kernel work on CPU's with 192 cores) but rather scalability of the development process, and (b) the talk was only scheduled for 20 minutes. So I talked to Alex off-line, and we agreed that best approach was probably to transfer his session transferred to the kernel summit track, where he would be able to get a 45 minute slot --- assuming, of course, that the Performance MC runners would be OK with this change. If people would like to talk more than what can fit in a 45 minute slot, there will be BOF session slots on Friday that people can request for more conversation. There will also be "hack rooms" that are available, which will not be live-streamed nor permanently recorded. Dave, Daniel, Pasha --- does this seem reasonable to you? Thanks, - Ted