Re: [RFC PATCH 00/15] acrn: add the ACRN driver module

[Zhao, Yakui]

On 2019å08æ19æ 13:25, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:44:25AM +0800, Zhao, Yakui wrote:
> > On 2019å08æ16æ 14:39, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:25:41AM +0800, Zhao Yakui wrote:
> > > > The first three patches are the changes under x86/acrn, which adds the
> > > > required APIs for the driver and reports the X2APIC caps.
> > > > The remaining patches add the ACRN driver module, which accepts the ioctl
> > > > from user-space and then communicate with the low-level ACRN hypervisor
> > > > by using hypercall.
> > >
> > > I have a problem with that: you're adding interfaces to arch/x86/ and
> > > its users go into staging. Why? Why not directly put the driver where
> > > it belongs, clean it up properly and submit it like everything else is
> > > submitted?
> >
> > Thanks for your reply and the concern.
> >
> > After taking a look at several driver examples(gma500, android), it seems
> > that they are firstly added into drivers/staging/XXX and then moved to
> > drivers/XXX after the driver becomes mature.
> > So we refer to this method to upstream ACRN driver part.
>
> Those two examples are probably the worst examples to ever look at :)
>
> The code quality of those submissions was horrible, gma500 took a very
> long time to clean up and there are parts of the android code that are
> still in staging to this day.
>
> > If the new driver can also be added by skipping the staging approach,
> > we will refine it and then submit it in normal process.
>
> That is the normal process, staging should not be needed at all for any
> code.  It is a fall-back for when the company involved has no idea of
> how to upstream their code, which should NOT be the case here.

Thanks for your explanation.

OK. We will submit it in normal process.

> thanks,
>
> greg k-h