Re: patch "staging: remove nokia_hp4p driver

[Pali RohÃr]

On Sunday 31 August 2014 01:09:01 Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
> 
> >>> What is going on here? I get flamed for not cleaning up
> >>> the driver, because I cleaned it up before merging to
> >>> -staging. Ok, so I did more cleanups, sent 3 cleanup
> >>> patches, no reaction on those, and now I got a note that
> >>> you are going to remove the driver...?
> >> 
> >> For the 3 "cleanup" patches, the first one was rejected and
> >> you said to not include it, so I couldn't apply the
> >> others.
> > 
> > That was different series. I'm talking about:
> > 
> > [PATCH 1/3] staging: nokia_h4: switch to right types and use
> > bdaddr_t [PATCH 2/3] staging: nokia_h4: avoid __uX types
> > [PATCH 3/3] staging: use inlines where it makes sense
> > 
> > That is still valid and received no comments at all.
> 
> and these are all trivial cleanups and could have been done
> back in January when this driver was merged into staging. It
> is end of August now and nothing happened to address anything
> in the TODO file.
> 
> The warning from end of May that this driver will be removed
> seemed to not have triggered anybody to work on the core
> issues of the driver.
> 
> There are 3 major topics that needs addressing before this
> driver should come anywhere near upstream kernel again,
> staging or otherwise.
> 
> a) Convert to using device tree for device detection
> 
> b) Convert to using hdev->setup for firmware loading
> 
> c) Convert to using hdev->set_bdaddr and
> HCI_QUIRK_INVALID_BDADDR
> 
> Please keep in mind that this was not an ugly Windows driver
> with a lot of Windows specific typedefs or bad coding style
> or OS abstractions. From that point of view it was always
> good since it was written for Linux in the first place. It
> was just a bit dated. Any fixes to bring that in sync with
> all other drivers could have been done easily after it was
> merged into the Bluetooth subsystem.
> 
> The reason why it ended up in staging is that the 3 core
> problems needed fixing. And 8 month later they still have not
> been fixed.
> 
> >>> Please don't, I'd still like to clean the driver up and
> >>> get included, as n900's are still under active use.
> >> 
> >> As the Bluetooth maintainer has said a number of times, he
> >> doesn't want the driver in the tree as it is not doing the
> >> correct things.  It's been a long time in the tree with no
> >> work on it at all, and I follow the suggestions of the
> >> maintainers of the subsystems that staging drivers follow.
> > 
> > You asked for more work and explained how easy it is to
> > revert the removal.
> > 
> > I did more work, you ignored it, and are removing the
> > driver, anyway.
> 
> I have seen only fluff patches. Someone needs to address the
> core problems of the driver.
> 
> >> I suggest cleaning this up  in your own tree, and then just
> >> submitting it for inclusion in the "normal" part of the
> >> kernel.  That way I'm not
> > 
> > ...creating a mess in the history, and fun merge problems
> > for people actually using the driver :-(. And yes, n900
> > people actually are using it and have their own changes on
> > top of it.
> 
> That is even worse. We have a staging driver with external
> patches on top of it. Getting a driver into staging has an
> almost zero barrier and then people still not get their
> patches merged into staging. That is just plain said.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Marcel

Hello, external patch is only renaming driver name from 
btnokia_h4p to hci_h4p - nothing more. And it is only because of 
Maemo 5 userspace compatibility (which I fix when driver will be 
in regular bluetooth tree and will be stable). Driver itself is 
working (with any userspace). So it is not as bad as you think.

-- 
Pali RohÃr
pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.