From: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
To: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
ksummit@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] User-space requirements for accelerator drivers
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 15:57:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKMK7uFPxVosEvdwSOrfUvq7+W-dUo39ktEm2Yag_wvJ5YvZNg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210913135014.ydhk42ncnzakvvii@wittgenstein>
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 3:50 PM Christian Brauner
<christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 02:32:48PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 03:00:58PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > > There has been a regular disagreement in recent years about whether
> > > drivers for accelerators (such as for the Habana Gaudi device) should be
> > > subject to the same requirements as GPU drivers when it comes to the
> > > availability of a free implementation of the user-space side. It flared
> > > up again recently:
> > >
> > > https://lwn.net/Articles/867168/
> > >
> > > Happily, the Habana situation in particular seems to be resolving
> > > itself:
> > >
> > > https://lwn.net/ml/linux-kernel/CAFCwf119s7iXk+qpwoVPnRtOGcxeuZb3rnihf6NWWoVT-4ODHA@mail.gmail.com/
> > >
> > > But even there it is clear that the fundamental question has not yet
> > > been resolved.
> > >
> > > This seems like the sort of question that the maintainer summit exists
> > > to address. Specifically, we could discuss:
> > >
> > > - Under which circumstances should the kernel community require the
> > > existence of freely licensed user-space code that exercises all
> > > functionalities of a proposed kernel driver or feature?
> >
> > I think it'd be reasonable to ask, as well: if we required this for
> > *all* kernel functionality, such that we never add any userspace
> > interface to the kernel unless there's *some* Open Source userspace that
> > needs/wants it, what problems would that cause if any?
> >
> > It appears that in this case the kernel pushing back has influenced the
> > release of Open Source userspace code. Having a kernel-wide policy here
> > seems like it'll *help* people within many companies to push for such
> > changes: "We're never going to be able to get our changes into the
> > upstream kernel if there's no userspace to drive them."
>
> I can certainly see why that discussion is needed for features that deal
> with hardware which requires an elaborate userspace component in order
> to work.
> But I'm not convinced this policy makes sense for all kernel features.
> For example, when we introduce a new general api in kernel core it will
> often be driven by requirements of other well-known open source
> projects. If such projects state that they will add support for it once
> a kernel supporting this feature is released that expression of their
> intent is often sufficient. We usually don't make such projects jump
> through the hoops of implementing the userspace side upfront to proof
> that they would use it. Although to the credit of a few open source
> projects that does also happen. But I'm hesitant to make this a general
> rule.
I agree it's an orthogonal discussion, but I think we've also had our
fair share of fully generic interface that turned out to miss the mark
in real-world usage. This is why the generic kernel
modesetting/display interface for drivers in drivers/gpu also needs
fully open implementation. Not because we really need that for
long-term maintainability - the interfaces are generally well-defined
enough that testcases + docs are sufficient for that, but because in
practices it just catches so many small gotchas that are otherwise
overlooked in good generic uapi design.
But I do think we should keep this apart from the discussions for hw
drivers, where 80+% of the driver that's absolutely needed to drive
the hardware is in userspace.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-13 13:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-10 21:00 [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] User-space requirements for accelerator drivers Jonathan Corbet
2021-09-10 21:32 ` Josh Triplett
2021-09-13 13:50 ` Christian Brauner
2021-09-13 13:57 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2021-09-14 2:07 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-14 14:40 ` Jani Nikula
2021-09-14 14:45 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2021-09-14 14:59 ` Jani Nikula
2021-09-14 15:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2021-09-10 21:51 ` James Bottomley
2021-09-10 21:59 ` Alexandre Belloni
2021-09-10 22:35 ` James Bottomley
2021-09-11 14:51 ` Jonathan Corbet
2021-09-11 15:24 ` James Bottomley
2021-09-11 21:52 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-14 13:22 ` Johannes Berg
2021-09-11 0:08 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-10 22:52 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-09-10 23:45 ` Josh Triplett
2021-09-10 23:48 ` Dave Hansen
2021-09-11 0:13 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-10 23:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-11 0:20 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-11 14:20 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-09-11 22:08 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-11 22:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-09-11 23:10 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-13 11:10 ` Mark Brown
2021-09-11 22:51 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-09-11 23:22 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-09-11 10:31 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-11 11:41 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-11 12:04 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-11 22:04 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-12 4:27 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-12 7:26 ` Greg KH
2021-09-12 8:29 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-12 13:25 ` Greg KH
2021-09-12 14:15 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-12 14:34 ` Greg KH
2021-09-12 16:41 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-12 20:35 ` Dave Airlie
2021-09-12 20:41 ` Dave Airlie
2021-09-12 20:49 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-12 21:12 ` Dave Airlie
2021-09-12 22:51 ` Linus Walleij
2021-09-12 23:15 ` Dave Airlie
2021-09-13 13:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-09-13 13:54 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-13 22:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-09-13 23:33 ` Dave Airlie
2021-09-14 9:08 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-09-14 9:23 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-14 10:47 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-14 12:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-09-14 19:45 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-14 15:43 ` Luck, Tony
2021-09-13 14:52 ` James Bottomley
2021-09-14 13:07 ` Linus Walleij
2021-09-13 14:03 ` Mark Brown
2021-09-12 15:55 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-12 16:43 ` James Bottomley
2021-09-12 16:58 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-12 17:08 ` James Bottomley
2021-09-12 19:52 ` Dave Airlie
2021-09-12 7:46 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-09-12 8:00 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-09-12 14:53 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-12 15:41 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-09-10 23:46 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-11 0:38 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-09-11 9:27 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-11 22:33 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-09-13 12:04 ` Mark Brown
2021-09-12 19:13 ` Dave Airlie
2021-09-12 19:48 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-09-13 2:26 ` Dave Airlie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAKMK7uFPxVosEvdwSOrfUvq7+W-dUo39ktEm2Yag_wvJ5YvZNg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=ksummit@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).