[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGETcx-5pBJK4y84QJfr7cTjsd_GhHyuZJfjmYZ8CN0vKXOxcw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 21:52:12 -0700
From: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"Cc: Android Kernel" <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] arm64: Kconfig: Update ARCH_EXYNOS select configs
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 9:02 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 09:10:31PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > Generally, the subsystems being mentioned here are so basic (clock,
> > pinctrl, rtc), that I really can't imagine what kind of rocket science
> > one might want to hide for competitive reasons... If it's for an
> > entire SoC, I wonder why Intel and AMD don't have similar concerns and
> > contribute support for their newest hardware far before the release.
>
> There is no reason at all, and to be honest this whole discussion with
> these bullshit arguments from the Google/Linaro/SoC vendor crowd just
> shows how on crack these people are, and shows a good example of why
> we should not support these models at all. There is no good reason
> to "overide" uptream functionality EVER. Stop digging yourselves into
> your ever bigger holes and just f***king contribute upstream NOW. Just
> as we always have we should not give you more rope to shoot yoursel
> while ausing us extra overhead.
Maybe you need to read up the code of conduct again.
-Saravana
Powered by blists - more mailing lists