linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: android: ion: Skip sync if not mapped

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:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:03:39 -0700
From:   John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        driverdevel <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
        Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK" 
        <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
        Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
        Anders Pedersen <anders.pedersen@....com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        "Darren Hart (VMware)" <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Ørjan Eide <orjan.eide@....com>,
        nd <nd@....com>, Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, Laura Abbott <laura@...bott.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: android: ion: Skip sync if not mapped

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 AM Christian Brauner
<christian.brauner@...ntu.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 12:25:08PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 09:41:31PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> > > But I do think we can mark it as deprecated and let folks know that
> > > around the end of the year it will be deleted.
> >
> > No one ever notices "depreciated" things, they only notice if the code
> > is no longer there :)
> >
> > So I'm all for just deleting it and seeing who even notices...
>
> Agreed.

I mean, I get there's not much love for ION in staging, and I too am
eager to see it go, but I also feel like in the discussions around
submitting the dmabuf heaps at talks, etc, that there was clear value
in removing ION after a short time so that folks could transition
being able to test both implementations against the same kernel so
performance regressions, etc could be worked out.

I am actively getting many requests for help for vendors who are
looking at dmabuf heaps and are starting the transition process, and
I'm trying my best to motivate them to directly work within the
community so their needed heap functionality can go upstream. But it's
going to be a process, and their first attempts aren't going to
magically land upstream.  I think being able to really compare their
implementations as they iterate and push things upstream will help in
order to be able to have upstream solutions that are also properly
functional for production usage.

The dmabuf heaps have been in an official kernel now for all of three
weeks. So yea, we can "delete [ION] and see who even notices", but I
worry that may seem a bit like contempt for the folks doing the work
on transitioning over, which doesn't help getting them to participate
within the community.

thanks
-john