From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755586AbaEGD6w (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2014 23:58:52 -0400 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.64]:64868 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751455AbaEGD6u (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2014 23:58:50 -0400 Message-ID: <5369AF6D.9060509@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 11:58:37 +0800 From: Ding Tianhong User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Li Zefan CC: sanil kumar , , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IEhVTEsgbWFuYWdlbWVudCBwb2xpY3kgYW5kIHVzZXIgbWFudWE=?= =?UTF-8?B?bC12MS40Ly9SZTog5pS26ZuG5LqG5aSn5a6255qE5oSP6KeB77yM5L+u5pS55LqG?= =?UTF-8?B?6YOo5YiG5YiG5pSv566h55CG44CCLy/mrKfmi4nnu5/kuIDlhoXmoLjniYjmnKw=?= =?UTF-8?B?566h55CG562W55Wl5Lul5Y+K5pON5L2c5omL5YaMLy9SZTog56Gu6K6k5LiA5LiL?= =?UTF-8?B?5ZCE5L2N6KaB6K6/6Zeu5ZOq5Lqb5LuT5bqTIC8vIFJlOiDor7flkITkvY3mj5A=?= =?UTF-8?B?5L6b6K6/6ZeuIGdpdCDmnI3liqHlmajnmoTlhazpkqUgLy8gUmU6IEZ3OiDpnIA=?= =?UTF-8?B?6KaB5Yqg5YWl5Lit6L2v5YaF6YOoZ2l05Lul5Y+KbWFpbGxpc3TnmoTlkI3ljZU=?= References: <5368C270.9030208@huawei.com> <5368C46F.7080406@huawei.com> <5368D34F.5070301@huawei.com> <53699E44.4050400@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <53699E44.4050400@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.22.246] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014/5/7 10:45, Li Zefan wrote: > On 2014/5/6 20:19, Ding Tianhong wrote: >> On 2014/5/6 19:15, sanil kumar wrote: >>> On 5/6/2014 4:37 PM, Ding Tianhong wrote: >>>> On 2014/5/6 17:29, maobibo 00177601 wrote: >>>>> Hi Tianhong, >>>>> >>>>> I have two questions about the HULK >>>>> 1) When we get kernel from HULK such as euler-arm64branch, if there are some bugs in the branch and we report this bug, >>>>> will CSI team be responsible to fix the bug? >>>> >>>> If the bug is exist in the kernel and not from third-party application just like Customer's own drivers, I have to say "YES", we >>>> will fix them and upstream them. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2) When we submit a patch to HULK and if it is accepted, will CSI team be response to push it to upstream mainline branch? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If this patch is developed by yourself, and only for features or capabilities, you have to upstream the patch yourself. >>> If we don't have strategy to handle this, we may end up facing issues with long term maintenance of HULK. Do you see this risk? >>> This can be applicable to any patches whether its coming from external or internal members of CSI. >> >> Hi sanil: >> >> Yes, I got your opinion, and we already face this problem several times, in principle everyone should be responsible for their own code, >> I hope every patch in our HULK repository could be applied to linux mainline tree, the CSI should help them to make the code more in line >> with the community standard, it is a relationship, not a obligations. >> >> So I think we should discuss the strategy together, In my opinion, there is no external or internal members of CSI, everyone is a >> kernel developer, if the code or patch has a good reason to upstream to the linux mainline tree, the author should have responsibility to handle >> this work, if the author met some problem and could not handle this alone, our HULK team should help him to upstream, this is a great team should do. >> >> Hi zefan: >> As a senior expert, can you give us more suggestion to handle this, thanks. >> > > As I'm not working on arm64, I don't know how you guys have been co-operating. :) > > Can't we learn from the development process of LSK? > > How about we obey a rule "upstream first". Patches are sent to our internal mailing > list for review, and then they should be sent to the community. They won't be accepted > by HULK util they are merged into mainline, or you have to explain why they aren't > accepted and why it's ok for HULK to merge them though. > > The principal is we should all work on upstreaming our code. We can't ask HULK to > do all the upstream work. > > The community doesn't like delegation, which means it should be the author that submits > the patch. However this is not a strict requirement. If you can fully understand the > patch and you're able to answer people's comments on this patch when it's posted, you > may submit it given you've got the autoher's approval. > Hi zefan: Thanks for your suggestion, I think it is more clear and reasonable, if we need deeper discussion, the branch maintainer for CHI and Hisilicon need to enter this discussion. Hi guozhu, wangwei: I need to know the branch maintainer for your department, please tell me the name and then I could discussion with them for the strategy and perfect the HULK document, thanks for any suggestion. Regards Ding > btw what does CSI mean? > Central Software Institute :) > > . >