* kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS @ 2021-08-24 1:05 Alex Levin 2021-08-26 22:07 ` Linus Walleij 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Alex Levin @ 2021-08-24 1:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ksummit; +Cc: Jesse Barnes Hi Linux friends, Jesse Barnes, Chrome OS baseOS (Firmware+Kernel) lead, and myself would like to present the current state of affairs of the Linux kernel on ChromeOS and the challenges we face, how we solve them and get your feedback. We can also talk about how our efforts can help upstream development, for example by running experiments in the field to compare approaches to a specific problem or area. Shipping ChromeOS to millions of users that span across hundreds of different platforms, multiple active kernel versions and across many different SoC architectures, introduces interesting challenges: - Testing the upstream RC on as many platforms as we can as early as we can. - Updating the Linux kernel on existing platforms (millions of users at a time). - Managing technical “debt” and keeping the ChromeOS kernel as close as possible to the upstream kernel. - Current pain points in dealing with upstream. We feel 45-60 minutes would be enough and will allow a discussion. Thanks a lot in advance, Alex Levin, ChromeOS platform tech lead. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-24 1:05 kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS Alex Levin @ 2021-08-26 22:07 ` Linus Walleij 2021-08-26 22:27 ` Laurent Pinchart 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2021-08-26 22:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alex Levin; +Cc: ksummit, Jesse Barnes On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 3:06 AM Alex Levin <levinale@google.com> wrote: > - Testing the upstream RC on as many platforms as we can as early as we can. > - Updating the Linux kernel on existing platforms (millions of users at a time). > - Managing technical “debt” and keeping the ChromeOS kernel as close > as possible to the upstream kernel. > - Current pain points in dealing with upstream. > > We feel 45-60 minutes would be enough and will allow a discussion. I think this is really interesting. Also explain what this stuff is: drivers/platform/chrome/* and why it is so necessarily different and can't live in existing subsystems? Also: your experience with using ACPI and when firmware can be fixed and when it can not, and when/if the kernel has to accommodate quirks rather than fixing the firmware. Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-26 22:07 ` Linus Walleij @ 2021-08-26 22:27 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-08-27 1:01 ` Alex Levin 2021-08-27 13:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn 0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-08-26 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: Alex Levin, ksummit, Jesse Barnes On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:07:56AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 3:06 AM Alex Levin wrote: > > > - Testing the upstream RC on as many platforms as we can as early as we can. > > - Updating the Linux kernel on existing platforms (millions of users at a time). > > - Managing technical “debt” and keeping the ChromeOS kernel as close > > as possible to the upstream kernel. > > - Current pain points in dealing with upstream. > > > > We feel 45-60 minutes would be enough and will allow a discussion. > > I think this is really interesting. > > Also explain what this stuff is: drivers/platform/chrome/* and why it is > so necessarily different and can't live in existing subsystems? > > Also: your experience with using ACPI and when firmware can be > fixed and when it can not, and when/if the kernel has to accommodate > quirks rather than fixing the firmware. Could this also include lessons learnt related to convincing and helping SoC vendors to upstream drivers ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-26 22:27 ` Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-08-27 1:01 ` Alex Levin 2021-08-27 20:22 ` Linus Walleij ` (2 more replies) 2021-08-27 13:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn 1 sibling, 3 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Alex Levin @ 2021-08-27 1:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Pinchart; +Cc: Linus Walleij, ksummit, Jesse Barnes Thanks for the feedback Linus and Laurent. We are willing to extend this to 90 minutes and cover the opportunities and challenges we have WRT to SoC manufacturers upstreaming and how ChromeOS is influencing upstreaming. I wasn't sure we will be accepted as a ksummit so it seems that the track for now is a MC, but that might change. > Also: your experience with using ACPI and when firmware can be > fixed and when it can not, and when/if the kernel has to accommodate > quirks rather than fixing the firmware. We can definitely touch on this topic. It might be too narrow of a topic to discuss widely (I would gladly have a virtual cup of coffee), but we will include in our talk the FW challenges we see and how they impact kernel deployment, development and uprev. It goes a tad above (or beyond?) quirks. > Also explain what this stuff is: drivers/platform/chrome/* and why it is > so necessarily different and can't live in existing subsystems? This is our cros_ec (Chrome OS embedded controller) driver On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 3:27 PM Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:07:56AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 3:06 AM Alex Levin wrote: > > > > > - Testing the upstream RC on as many platforms as we can as early as we can. > > > - Updating the Linux kernel on existing platforms (millions of users at a time). > > > - Managing technical “debt” and keeping the ChromeOS kernel as close > > > as possible to the upstream kernel. > > > - Current pain points in dealing with upstream. > > > > > > We feel 45-60 minutes would be enough and will allow a discussion. > > > > I think this is really interesting. > > > > Also explain what this stuff is: drivers/platform/chrome/* and why it is > > so necessarily different and can't live in existing subsystems? > > > > Also: your experience with using ACPI and when firmware can be > > fixed and when it can not, and when/if the kernel has to accommodate > > quirks rather than fixing the firmware. > > Could this also include lessons learnt related to convincing and helping > SoC vendors to upstream drivers ? > > -- > Regards, > > Laurent Pinchart -- -Alex ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-27 1:01 ` Alex Levin @ 2021-08-27 20:22 ` Linus Walleij 2021-08-30 17:25 ` Jonathan Cameron 2021-08-30 15:19 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-08-30 19:33 ` Theodore Ts'o 2 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2021-08-27 20:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alex Levin; +Cc: Laurent Pinchart, ksummit, Jesse Barnes On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 3:01 AM Alex Levin <levinale@google.com> wrote: > > Also: your experience with using ACPI and when firmware can be > > fixed and when it can not, and when/if the kernel has to accommodate > > quirks rather than fixing the firmware. > > We can definitely touch on this topic. It might be too narrow of a > topic to discuss widely (I would gladly have a virtual cup of coffee), This has been and remains a really big and recurring problem for drivers across the whole board of devices using ACPI, so I bet more people are interested. Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-27 20:22 ` Linus Walleij @ 2021-08-30 17:25 ` Jonathan Cameron 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2021-08-30 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij Cc: Alex Levin, Laurent Pinchart, ksummit, Jesse Barnes, jonathan.cameron On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 22:22:15 +0200 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 3:01 AM Alex Levin <levinale@google.com> wrote: > > > > Also: your experience with using ACPI and when firmware can be > > > fixed and when it can not, and when/if the kernel has to accommodate > > > quirks rather than fixing the firmware. > > > > We can definitely touch on this topic. It might be too narrow of a > > topic to discuss widely (I would gladly have a virtual cup of coffee), > > This has been and remains a really big and recurring problem > for drivers across the whole board of devices using ACPI, so I bet > more people are interested. > > Yours, > Linus Walleij > Indeed. I'm interested (in this and the proposal in general!) Jonathan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-27 1:01 ` Alex Levin 2021-08-27 20:22 ` Linus Walleij @ 2021-08-30 15:19 ` Theodore Ts'o 2021-08-30 19:33 ` Theodore Ts'o 2 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2021-08-30 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alex Levin; +Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Linus Walleij, ksummit, Jesse Barnes On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 06:01:04PM -0700, Alex Levin wrote: > Thanks for the feedback Linus and Laurent. > > We are willing to extend this to 90 minutes and cover the > opportunities and challenges we have WRT to SoC manufacturers > upstreaming and how ChromeOS is influencing upstreaming. > > I wasn't sure we will be accepted as a ksummit so it seems that the > track for now is a MC, but that might change. Kernel Summit sessions are only 45 minutes, but we do have plenty of time for BOF's. What MC track were you proposing this for? - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-27 1:01 ` Alex Levin 2021-08-27 20:22 ` Linus Walleij 2021-08-30 15:19 ` Theodore Ts'o @ 2021-08-30 19:33 ` Theodore Ts'o [not found] ` <CAMJEoco4eHw6A04nBBtnCMOMW7HsE16uKMsNy02hRP1vt1C-AA@mail.gmail.com> 2 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2021-08-30 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dave.bueso, daniel.m.jordan, pasha.tatashin Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Linus Walleij, ksummit, Jesse Barnes, Alex Levin On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 06:01:04PM -0700, Alex Levin wrote: > Thanks for the feedback Linus and Laurent. > > We are willing to extend this to 90 minutes and cover the > opportunities and challenges we have WRT to SoC manufacturers > upstreaming and how ChromeOS is influencing upstreaming. > > I wasn't sure we will be accepted as a ksummit so it seems that the > track for now is a MC, but that might change. I've added the Performance and Scalability MC runners to this thread. After taking a closer look at the proposal submitted to the Performance MC: https://linuxplumbersconf.org/event/11/abstracts/1042/ ... I noted that (a) the proposal wasn't about scalability in the traditional sense (e.g., how well does the kernel work on CPU's with 192 cores) but rather scalability of the development process, and (b) the talk was only scheduled for 20 minutes. So I talked to Alex off-line, and we agreed that best approach was probably to transfer his session transferred to the kernel summit track, where he would be able to get a 45 minute slot --- assuming, of course, that the Performance MC runners would be OK with this change. If people would like to talk more than what can fit in a 45 minute slot, there will be BOF session slots on Friday that people can request for more conversation. There will also be "hack rooms" that are available, which will not be live-streamed nor permanently recorded. Dave, Daniel, Pasha --- does this seem reasonable to you? Thanks, - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <CAMJEoco4eHw6A04nBBtnCMOMW7HsE16uKMsNy02hRP1vt1C-AA@mail.gmail.com>]
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS [not found] ` <CAMJEoco4eHw6A04nBBtnCMOMW7HsE16uKMsNy02hRP1vt1C-AA@mail.gmail.com> @ 2021-08-30 20:49 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2021-08-30 21:05 ` Daniel Jordan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Davidlohr Bueso @ 2021-08-30 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Ts'o Cc: Daniel Jordan, Pavel Tatashin, Laurent Pinchart, Linus Walleij, ksummit, Jesse Barnes, Alex Levin (resending in plain text, sorry). This is fine by me, and we had noted that this proposal was not about performance in the conventional way, so being in ksummit track makes sense. Thanks, Davidlohr On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 1:44 PM Davidlohr Bueso <dave.bueso@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is fine by me, and we had noted that this proposal was not about performance in the conventional way, so being in ksummit track makes sense. > > Thanks, > Davidlohr > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 12:33 PM Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 06:01:04PM -0700, Alex Levin wrote: >> > Thanks for the feedback Linus and Laurent. >> > >> > We are willing to extend this to 90 minutes and cover the >> > opportunities and challenges we have WRT to SoC manufacturers >> > upstreaming and how ChromeOS is influencing upstreaming. >> > >> > I wasn't sure we will be accepted as a ksummit so it seems that the >> > track for now is a MC, but that might change. >> >> I've added the Performance and Scalability MC runners to this thread. >> >> After taking a closer look at the proposal submitted to the >> Performance MC: >> >> https://linuxplumbersconf.org/event/11/abstracts/1042/ >> >> ... I noted that (a) the proposal wasn't about scalability in the >> traditional sense (e.g., how well does the kernel work on CPU's with >> 192 cores) but rather scalability of the development process, and (b) >> the talk was only scheduled for 20 minutes. >> >> So I talked to Alex off-line, and we agreed that best approach was >> probably to transfer his session transferred to the kernel summit >> track, where he would be able to get a 45 minute slot --- assuming, of >> course, that the Performance MC runners would be OK with this change. >> >> If people would like to talk more than what can fit in a 45 minute >> slot, there will be BOF session slots on Friday that people can >> request for more conversation. There will also be "hack rooms" that >> are available, which will not be live-streamed nor permanently >> recorded. >> >> Dave, Daniel, Pasha --- does this seem reasonable to you? >> >> Thanks, >> >> - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-30 20:49 ` Davidlohr Bueso @ 2021-08-30 21:05 ` Daniel Jordan 2021-08-31 19:21 ` Pavel Tatashin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jordan @ 2021-08-30 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Pavel Tatashin, Laurent Pinchart, Linus Walleij, ksummit, Jesse Barnes, Alex Levin On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 01:49:43PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > This is fine by me, and we had noted that this proposal was not about > performance in the conventional way, so being in ksummit track makes > sense. Agreed, fine by me too. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-30 21:05 ` Daniel Jordan @ 2021-08-31 19:21 ` Pavel Tatashin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Pavel Tatashin @ 2021-08-31 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Jordan Cc: Davidlohr Bueso, Theodore Ts'o, Laurent Pinchart, Linus Walleij, ksummit, Jesse Barnes, Alex Levin Sounds good, to me. On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 5:05 PM Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 01:49:43PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > This is fine by me, and we had noted that this proposal was not about > > performance in the conventional way, so being in ksummit track makes > > sense. > > Agreed, fine by me too. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS 2021-08-26 22:27 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-08-27 1:01 ` Alex Levin @ 2021-08-27 13:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Serge E. Hallyn @ 2021-08-27 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Pinchart; +Cc: Linus Walleij, Alex Levin, ksummit, Jesse Barnes On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 01:27:10AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:07:56AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 3:06 AM Alex Levin wrote: > > > > > - Testing the upstream RC on as many platforms as we can as early as we can. > > > - Updating the Linux kernel on existing platforms (millions of users at a time). > > > - Managing technical “debt” and keeping the ChromeOS kernel as close > > > as possible to the upstream kernel. > > > - Current pain points in dealing with upstream. > > > > > > We feel 45-60 minutes would be enough and will allow a discussion. > > > > I think this is really interesting. > > > > Also explain what this stuff is: drivers/platform/chrome/* and why it is > > so necessarily different and can't live in existing subsystems? > > > > Also: your experience with using ACPI and when firmware can be > > fixed and when it can not, and when/if the kernel has to accommodate > > quirks rather than fixing the firmware. > > Could this also include lessons learnt related to convincing and helping > SoC vendors to upstream drivers ? That sounds awesome. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-08-31 19:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-08-24 1:05 kSummit proposal - The Linux kernel in ChromeOS Alex Levin
2021-08-26 22:07 ` Linus Walleij
2021-08-26 22:27 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-08-27 1:01 ` Alex Levin
2021-08-27 20:22 ` Linus Walleij
2021-08-30 17:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-08-30 15:19 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-08-30 19:33 ` Theodore Ts'o
[not found] ` <CAMJEoco4eHw6A04nBBtnCMOMW7HsE16uKMsNy02hRP1vt1C-AA@mail.gmail.com>
2021-08-30 20:49 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2021-08-30 21:05 ` Daniel Jordan
2021-08-31 19:21 ` Pavel Tatashin
2021-08-27 13:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn
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).