linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Qualcomm Cloud AI 100 driver

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, 20 May 2020 07:54:38 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof.johansson@...il.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
        Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>,
        Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        wufan@...eaurora.org, pratanan@...eaurora.org,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Qualcomm Cloud AI 100 driver

On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 10:11:35PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 19 May 21:59 PDT 2020, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 10:41:15PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > Ok, that's a decision you are going to have to push upward on, as we
> > > > really can't take this without a working, open, userspace.
> > > 
> > > Uh wut.
> > > 
> > > So the merge criteria for drivers/accel (atm still drivers/misc but I
> > > thought that was interim until more drivers showed up) isn't actually
> > > "totally-not-a-gpu accel driver without open source userspace".
> > > 
> > > Instead it's "totally-not-a-gpu accel driver without open source
> > > userspace" _and_ you have to be best buddies with Greg. Or at least
> > > not be on the naughty company list. Since for habanalabs all you
> > > wanted is a few test cases to exercise the ioctls. Not the entire
> > > userspace.
> > 
> > Habanalabs now has their full library opensourced that their tools use
> > directly, so that's not an argument anymore.
> > 
> > My primary point here is the copyright owner of this code, because of
> > that, I'm not going to objet to allowing this to be merged without open
> > userspace code.
> > 
> 
> So because it's copyright Linux Foundation you are going to accept it
> without user space, after all?

Huh, no, the exact opposite, sorry, drop the "not" in that above
sentence.  My bad.

greg k-h