Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] fbtft: Unorphan the driver for maintenance

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 03:18:14PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 1/26/22 15:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 02:47:33PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >> On 1/26/22 14:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 12:18:30PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >>>> On 1/26/22 11:59, Helge Deller wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/26/22 11:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> >>>>>> P.S. For the record, I will personally NAK any attempts to remove that
> >>>>>> driver from the kernel. And this is another point why it's better not
> >>>>>> to be under the staging.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree. Same as for me to NAK the disabling of fbcon's acceleration
> >>>>> features or even attempting to remove fbdev altogether (unless all
> >>>>> relevant drivers are ported to DRM).
> >>>>
> >>>> But that will never happen if we keep moving the goal post.
> >>>>
> >>>> At some point new fbdev drivers should not be added anymore, otherwise
> >>>> the number of existing drivers that need conversion will keep growing.
> >>>
> >>> This thread is not about adding a new driver.
> >>
> >> It was about adding a new drivers to drivers/video/ (taken from staging).
> > 
> > Does it mean gates are open to take any new fbdev drivers to the staging?
> > If not, I do not see a point here.
> > 
> 
> Good question. I don't know really.
> 
> But staging has always been more flexible in what's accepted there and
> that's why some distros avoid to enable CONFIG_STAGING=y in the kernel.

And that's why if you load a staging driver, it enables TAINT_CRAP in
your runtime flags :)