On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Scott Bambrough <scott.bambro...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 12-05-17 03:37 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 07:42 +0800, Andy Green wrote: >>> >>> Just curious... how many LTs have Mali stuff? If it's more than one, we >>> should perhaps be talking about moving it to linux-linaro-core-tracking. >> >> >> We have two teams with three different versions of the driver ;-) with, >> I suspect, custom modifications (different memory management >> components?). > > > Yes, there are three different memory managers (UMP from ARM, HWMEM from > STE, and UMM). > >> From my bystanders point of view, the interaction with closed source >> binary blobs seems to cause people enough nightmares without also trying >> to converge code-lines between teams. Especially when engineering >> resources are spread so thin. >> >> Fortunately (?), the two teams have the drivers under different paths >> with different module and Kconfig option naming, so they could coexist >> in the same tree. > > > It would be best if the driver and user space was converted to use UMM so we > could drop UMP/HWMEM, and standardize on one driver. Added Jesse here as he > may have some info that is relevant.
Scott is right, and we are pushing slowly in that direction, but it will be a while before that is possible for all Mali400 instances could be supported from a single stack. cheers, Jesse > > Scott > > -- > Scott Bambrough > Technical Director, Member Services > Linaro Ltd. _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
