linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] Add Rockchip RGA support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:03:57 +0100
From:	Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@...il.com>
To:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc:	Yakir Yang <ykk@...k-chips.com>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
	Mark Yao <mark.yao@...k-chips.com>,
	Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@...sung.com>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ML dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	linux-rockchip <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
	LAKML <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] Add Rockchip RGA support

On 29 March 2016 at 14:13, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@...il.com> wrote:
> On 28 March 2016 at 23:13, Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de> wrote:
>
>> I have the feeling we're going quite a bit off-topic right now :-) .
>> The binary-driver-crazyness, hasn't really anything to do with Yakir's support
>> for the RGA (which is about raster-graphics-acceleration, so 2d stuff).
>>
>> And me mentioning the armsoc-ddx was merely a means to allow some sort of
>> different userspace user, as requested in your original mail ;-) .
>>
> Seems like I forgot to state the obvious - for all the reasons
> mentioned, the armsoc ddx seems like a bad example.
>
>> Maybe you know a better use-case on where to demonstrate the viability of the
>> userspace API for it as originally requested.
> I'm afraid that my RockChip-foo is extremely limited. Perhaps the
> actual user of these should be mentioned ? xf86-video-rockhip (is
> there one ?) or any other effort/project that lacks some (all?) of the
> criticism listed.
>
> (Sort of) the bottom line - either reuse the existing interfaces or
> provide an approved, full blown userspace (libdrm demos/programs do
> not count) that uses the new interfaces.
>
> I haven't made these rules, just a fool^Wguy that repeats them so that
> people don't abuse them much. If in doubt check with Dave and Daniel V
> - they had enough repeating these.
>
I can see how my earlier response may have been come
across/interpreted as aggressive and/or demanding. Apologies anyone
got upset/annoyed.

Let me try in another light - if you guys are willing to have
xf86-video-rockchip or keep track of/co-maintain armsoc, pretty much
everyone will be over the moon. Personally I'd opt for the former,
taking the modesetting (the one in the xserver tree) as a base - it
has all the cool new bits ;-)

Regards,
Emil