[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#483699: video-nsc: PCI ID conflict with newer video-geode

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
>> We have a way to be that precise, by statically defining what it
>> actually supports, rather than grepping the driver for every ID that
>> we find and hope that ALL resulting vendor+device combinations we
>> produce are actually supported.
> Please stop being so arrogant and claiming that we are doing just random
> crap in our patch.
> The driver does claim support for 4 chip ids * 2 vendor ids while your
> patch only keep 2 chip ids * 1 vendor ids. If we really need to ignore
> 75% of the upstream hardware support, you're going to have to talk to
> upstream about removing this hardware support that doesn't have to be there.

AMD bought all Geode designs and codes the upstream GIT tree at X.org,
so it in fact is the only valid upstream.

In practice, other X.org contributors has inserted stuff into the -nsc
branch that has no upstream approval.  That's where those conflicts
come from.

>> As it so happens, my static list was
>> validated by someone from AMD as being the correct one.
> Why should I care more about AMD than about upstream?

Because AMD *is* the upstream.

>> 1) The Geode chipset has a history that spans 3 chip manufacturers. In
>> some cases, existing PCI ID were maintained, despite changes in the
>> device, between generations of chips made by the next manufacturer.
> Needs to be fixed upstream.

And you intend on fixing that how?  By inventing a time machine to
change the PCI ID claimed by 4 generations of Geodes, in their silicon

>> 2) Small parts of the code are mutually-compatible between Geode
>> generations, but not enough to allow any driver to claim support for
>> all Geodes.
> Needs to be fixed upstream.
>> 4) GX2 support was never a part of the upstream NSC driver.  However,
>> someone thought they would backport GX2 support into the NSC driver,
>> using code from the OLPC prototype's GIT tree.
> Needs to be fixed upstream.
>> 5) Official support for the GX2 only exists in the -geode driver.
>> Because of this, any claim in -nsc to support it will definitely cause
>> problems, both because it has PCI ID conflicts, and because -nsc
>> doesn't have official upstream support.
> No maintainer doesn't mean that you can't send a patch to fix the
> upstream driver. I can even commit it upstream for you (once somebody
> will have acked it).
> All this discussion should really be moved upstream from my point of
> view. Once the upstream driver will have been fixed, we'll see if
> there's actually something to fix in our patch. In the meantime, please
> stop being arrogant and claiming that our patch does random stuff. It
> just exposes what the driver claims. If the driver claims crap, that's
> not our fault.

Just because the driver claims crap doesn't mean we cannot fix it, so
stop being arrogant that we cannot do anything about it to restore
usability at the distro level.

Martin-Éric Racine

Reply to: