From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751107AbaHaIYL (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 04:24:11 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com ([74.125.82.181]:55608 "EHLO mail-we0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750740AbaHaIYC (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 04:24:02 -0400 From: Pali =?utf-8?q?Roh=C3=A1r?= To: Marcel Holtmann Subject: Re: patch "staging: remove nokia_hp4p driver Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 10:23:57 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.13.0-32-generic; KDE/4.13.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Pavel Machek , Greg KH , Miguel Oliveira , kernel list , Linus Torvalds References: <14094295422869@kroah.com> <20140830224430.GA19622@amd> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart18073896.AQ9HURVjSc"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201408311023.57669@pali> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart18073896.AQ9HURVjSc Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sunday 31 August 2014 01:09:01 Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Pavel, >=20 > >>> What is going on here? I get flamed for not cleaning up > >>> the driver, because I cleaned it up before merging to > >>> -staging. Ok, so I did more cleanups, sent 3 cleanup > >>> patches, no reaction on those, and now I got a note that > >>> you are going to remove the driver...? > >>=20 > >> For the 3 "cleanup" patches, the first one was rejected and > >> you said to not include it, so I couldn't apply the > >> others. > >=20 > > That was different series. I'm talking about: > >=20 > > [PATCH 1/3] staging: nokia_h4: switch to right types and use > > bdaddr_t [PATCH 2/3] staging: nokia_h4: avoid __uX types > > [PATCH 3/3] staging: use inlines where it makes sense > >=20 > > That is still valid and received no comments at all. >=20 > and these are all trivial cleanups and could have been done > back in January when this driver was merged into staging. It > is end of August now and nothing happened to address anything > in the TODO file. >=20 > The warning from end of May that this driver will be removed > seemed to not have triggered anybody to work on the core > issues of the driver. >=20 > There are 3 major topics that needs addressing before this > driver should come anywhere near upstream kernel again, > staging or otherwise. >=20 > a) Convert to using device tree for device detection >=20 > b) Convert to using hdev->setup for firmware loading >=20 > c) Convert to using hdev->set_bdaddr and > HCI_QUIRK_INVALID_BDADDR >=20 > Please keep in mind that this was not an ugly Windows driver > with a lot of Windows specific typedefs or bad coding style > or OS abstractions. From that point of view it was always > good since it was written for Linux in the first place. It > was just a bit dated. Any fixes to bring that in sync with > all other drivers could have been done easily after it was > merged into the Bluetooth subsystem. >=20 > The reason why it ended up in staging is that the 3 core > problems needed fixing. And 8 month later they still have not > been fixed. >=20 > >>> Please don't, I'd still like to clean the driver up and > >>> get included, as n900's are still under active use. > >>=20 > >> As the Bluetooth maintainer has said a number of times, he > >> doesn't want the driver in the tree as it is not doing the > >> correct things. It's been a long time in the tree with no > >> work on it at all, and I follow the suggestions of the > >> maintainers of the subsystems that staging drivers follow. > >=20 > > You asked for more work and explained how easy it is to > > revert the removal. > >=20 > > I did more work, you ignored it, and are removing the > > driver, anyway. >=20 > I have seen only fluff patches. Someone needs to address the > core problems of the driver. >=20 > >> I suggest cleaning this up in your own tree, and then just > >> submitting it for inclusion in the "normal" part of the > >> kernel. That way I'm not > >=20 > > ...creating a mess in the history, and fun merge problems > > for people actually using the driver :-(. And yes, n900 > > people actually are using it and have their own changes on > > top of it. >=20 > That is even worse. We have a staging driver with external > patches on top of it. Getting a driver into staging has an > almost zero barrier and then people still not get their > patches merged into staging. That is just plain said. >=20 > Regards >=20 > Marcel Hello, external patch is only renaming driver name from=20 btnokia_h4p to hci_h4p - nothing more. And it is only because of=20 Maemo 5 userspace compatibility (which I fix when driver will be=20 in regular bluetooth tree and will be stable). Driver itself is=20 working (with any userspace). So it is not as bad as you think. =2D-=20 Pali Roh=C3=A1r pali.rohar@gmail.com --nextPart18073896.AQ9HURVjSc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAlQC250ACgkQi/DJPQPkQ1KQGwCgud9sYGMTRSbkFo4tXcjj8pZt VWEAoLPu4sI7aQL0xC1VEfsLT3uzf7mC =szpW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart18073896.AQ9HURVjSc--