On Wed, 2013-04-17 at 16:28 +0530, Tushar Behera wrote: > On 04/16/2013 09:46 AM, Andy Green wrote: > > On 16/04/13 10:08, the mail apparently from Selina Kuo included: > >> Hi, John, > >> > >> Your assumption is right. The ump code is part of the out-of-tree mali > >> driver. > >> > >> > >> - Selina Kuo, one of Andy's colleagues ^^ > > > > As Selina says it's a code drop we got via Fujitsu from ARM for the OOT > > Mali driver. > > > > However that code is all GPL2, as it should be. > > > > I think any of the options are good, > > > > - make our own repo and keep it in sync with llct > > > > - privately encourage ARM to keep it in sync with Linus' HEAD, publicly > > > > - upstream it so it's always in sync > > > > This obviously helps of all LT who want to / can harmonize their tree on > > llct basis. > > > > Tushar, do you have any opinion? > > > > It would always help to have the Mali driver synced with latest upstream > and getting merged into 'llct'. The LT's who need to use this driver can > have their modifications (if any) on top of it.
Each LT will have to make sure that their changes are suitably guarded with #ifdefs to avoid stepping on each other's toes. But then that isn't going to work with a multi-platform kernel. So the changes are going to need to be made run-time configurable based on device-tree or something. Speaking of device-tree, do the Mali drivers have device-tree support? -- Tixy _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
