Re: [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] User-space requirements for accelerator drivers

Jani Nikula
2021-09-14T14:59:58Z

On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Hi Jani,
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 4:40 PM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Sep 2021, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 03:00:58PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> >> - What constitutes an acceptable user-space implementation in cases
>> >> where these restrictions apply?
>> >
>> > This seems like it'll always be a fuzzy line. The main issue: it's OK if
>> > there are both open and proprietary users, but it's not OK if the only
>> > open implementation is an outdated or token project that nobody actually
>> > uses, that exists and is maintained solely for the purposes of placating
>> > the kernel requirement. There's no easy way to define that line, other
>> > than "we'll know it when we see it".
>>
>> One aspect of it should be easy enough: If you have an issue with your
>> proprietary stack, but you can't reproduce it with the open stack, you
>> won't get your fix in the kernel.
>
> Which basically boils down to the old mantra: before fixing a bug,
> first add a new test case to trigger the bug.

Oh, but then the question becomes, is it enough to add a reproducer,
simplified from your proprietary stack, in your test asset, and then fix
the kernel issue? Even if it's not a problem in your open stack at all?

BR,
Jani.

--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center