Re: Steps forward for the LoongArch UEFI bringup patch? (was: Re: [PATCH V14 11/24] LoongArch: Add boot and setup routines)

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 6:14 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 at 16:09, WANG Xuerui <kernel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > For this, I don't know if Huacai should really just leave those
> > modification in the downstream fork to keep the upstream Linux clean of
> > such hacks, because to some degree dealing with such notoriety is life,
> > it seems to me. I think at this point Huacai would cooperate and tweak
> > the patch to get rid of the SVAM and other nonstandard bits as much as
> > possible, and I'll help him where necessary too.
> >
>
> I don't want to be the one standing in your way, and I understand the
> desire to get this merged for the user space side of things. So
> perhaps it is better to merge this without the EFI support, and take
> another cycle to implement this properly across all the other
> components as well.

I think that's ok. As of today, there is still no working interrupt controller
driver because it hasn't passed review yet, so there is little value in
merging the boot support.

The main point of merging the port at all is of course to allow compile
testing and building userspace, and both can be done without being
able to boot it.

If Huacai is able to produce a tree by tomorrow that still builds and
leaves out the boot support, I can send a pull request to Linus and
let him make the final decision about it, but at this point I think there
is a good chance that he prefers to let it all sit for another release.

If the port doesn't make the cut for 5.19, we can still debate with the
libc maintainers whether they want to merge their side of it anyway,
given that the user ABI at least is now as stable as one plan for,
regardless of the upstream state.

      Arnd