linux-kernel - Re: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 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, 10 Jun 2009 23:37:10 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk>,
	san@...roid.com, rlove@...gle.com
Subject: Re: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support

Hi!

> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:31:31PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> Is there patch for Dream support for 2.6.30 somewhere? The best I
> >> could find is linux-msm tree, which is ... quite a big diff against
> >> 2.6.24:
> >
> > In short not as far as I know, and I'm very disappointed with the state
> > of affairs with google.
> >
> > Basically, the situation surrounding msm can be described as severely
> > wanting - bear in mind that it's been over a year since we last heard
> > anything from the msm guys as far as code submissions go.
> >
> > Personally, I think we should delete the entire codeset which was
> > submitted into mainline - it's next to useless and all the time that
> > folk sit on their hands not maintaining it, it's just not worth having
> > it anywhere near mainline.
> 
> I'd love to find an effective way to get more of the msm support
> cleaned up (as necessary) and into the mainline.  We're bringing our
> work forward and rebasing to keep tracking the latest released kernel,
> and working on getting core bits we need that other stuff depends on
> in -- look at the thread on linux-pm where the wakelock/suspendblocker
> framework has been reviewed, revised, resent repeatedly, etc.

I guess wakelocks should be removed from first version of drivers for merge.

> The msm7k unfortunately requires a lot of infrastructure to work given
> that the baseband (a black box to us) controls much of the world.
> Last time around when I tried submitting some of the core ipc support
> to talk to it on the lakml, there seemed to be uncertainty about who
> even would review that.

Try again, then :-). [Merging to drivers/staging is _very_ easy, and
even that is good first step.]

Actually, mailing patches so that people do not have to do git pull +
diff is very good zeroth step :-).

> We have full support for MSM7201A, including fully functional power
> management, working on a number of commercially shipping devices that
> we'd absolutely love to get into mainline.  Rebasing and bringing this
> stuff forward all the time is a lot of work and certainly not the
> optimal way to do it.  Getting it in a couple pieces at a time is slow
> going, but it seemed to cause frustration with just the small number
> of things we were looking for review/approval for...

I have some experience with patch merging, lets see if I can
help... It would be good to merge it upstream before the hw is
obsolete...

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/