News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch. Parent comment

Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by 0xcde4c3db on Friday December 09, 2016 @12:22AM (#13136849)
The problem isn't that sharing code across platforms is bad, it's that not sharing code within Linux is bad. Airlie is basically saying that if the kernel API and subsystems are somehow inadequate, AMD should improve them directly instead of covering them up with a bunch more code.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by wolfgke on Friday December 09, 2016 @06:36AM (#13138154)
> Airlie is basically saying that if the kernel API and subsystems are somehow inadequate, AMD should improve them directly instead of covering them up with a bunch more code.

And you really believe that the maintainers will be accepting a giant patch that changes the API and subsystem completely (though into something better) that has the risk of causing lots of regressions to existing drivers? And you believe that AMD is supposed to fix all the regressions that are caused in drivers by other vendors that this change causes?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by brongondwana on Friday December 09, 2016 @07:10AM (#13138276)
Of course not, the maintainers will accept a well thought out series of patches that each make one small logical change towards the better interface.

And yes - who else is supposed to fix all the regressions caused by changes that AMD wants? Volunteers who would rather work on something else? If you want a change, you get to support the regressions - and if AMD's work gets merged, then anyone ELSE who wants to make a change in that page needs to support AMD's regressions.

Hence wanting to make sure that the changes from AMD are manageable and flexible enough to allow further changes.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by wolfgke on Friday December 09, 2016 @07:23AM (#13138321)
> If you want a change, you get to support the regressions

And what about a change to a stable internal kernel API, which the kernel developers refuse?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by pas on Friday December 09, 2016 @10:36AM (#13139279)
No, they just want a stable future, around which they can plan the API, but so far no one has delivered on that tiny requirement.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by prodigal_erik on Friday December 09, 2016 @10:00PM (#13143755)
Linux got where it is by evolving how the kernel and drivers interact whenever needed, without waiting to coordinate with outsiders and their closed work.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by the_why_of_y on Friday December 09, 2016 @02:21PM (#13141051)
The Linux kernel does not have stable internal kernel APIs.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/stable_api_nonsense...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Linux kernel maintainer says no to AMDGPU patch by wolfgke on Friday December 09, 2016 @06:02PM (#13142642)
This is exactly my point.
[ Parent | on HN ]