Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: make USB_DWC3_EXYNOS independent | From | Krzysztof Kozlowski <> | Date | Wed, 3 Mar 2021 17:50:31 +0100 |
| |
On 03/03/2021 17:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> And "new drivers" are almost always not really "new" as everyone uses >> much the same IP blocks. As proof of this patch where the DWC3 IP block >> is being used by multiple SoC vendors. To handle that, you split out >> the SoC-specific portions into sub-drivers, so that you can build a >> single image of the driver that works on multiple platforms. Nothing >> new, we've been doing this for years, it's just that out-of-mainline SoC >> trees that think they can touch "core IP block code" break this all the >> time, which is what I am pushing back on. > > I am perfectly fine with (and like it!) putting dwc3 exynos back into > base/main dwc3 and getting rid of USB_DWC3_EXYNOS entirely. But this > was not part of this patch... > >> >> Anyway, this is just me as a driver subsystem maintainer being grumpy to >> see ARCH_ dependancies on tiny little things like SoC-portions for >> generic IP drivers. Or on individual drivers (i.e. Samsung serial port >> driver), where they don't belong at all. > > At least with Samsung serial driver we see adding new SoC - Apple M1. > > Here, the guys in Samsung want to tweak several kernel parts to work > with their out-of-tree code without contributing this code back. It's > not a community-friendly approach. The upstream kernel should be tweaked > to the out-of-tree unknown, hidden and uncontrollable code.
Eh, obviously I wanted to say: The upstream kernel should *not* be tweaked to the out-of-tree unknown, hidden and uncontrollable code.
> > Instead I expect from Samsung to contribute the basic Exynos9 support to > the upstream.
Best regards, Krzysztof
| |