linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: What are the criteria for adding a port to linux-mips...

To: David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com>
Subject: Re: What are the criteria for adding a port to linux-mips...
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:17:59 +0000
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <437A5287.9030506@avtrex.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <437A5287.9030506@avtrex.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 01:26:31PM -0800, David Daney wrote:

> As you probably know I posted patches for my ATI Xilleon port to this 
> list several weeks ago.  I am in the process of incorporating changes 
> based on the feedback I received.
> 
> I guess my question is fairly simple:
> 
> What hurdles must I overcome in order to get the port added to linux-mips?

I'm trying to handle this no different than Linus or the other subsystem
maintainers.  So, basically:

 - Code should comply to Documentation/CodingStyle
 - Code must be maintainable.
 - There probably will be issues raised when posting patches.  Fix them ...
 - In general I won't consider patches for "one of" ports.
   (You asked a general question, so this is a general answer.  Obviously
   this point isn't a problem for a SOC such as the Xilleon.)
 - A platform is worthless without drivers, so I want to see drivers in a
   shape where they're at least reasonably close to acceptable by the
   respective subsystem maintainers.
 - In the past it happened several times that people sent me their patches,
   I applied them and that's about the last I ever heared and so without
   no hardware, not hardware documentation and as always not enough time
   code starts bitrotting away.  I would realliy appreciate if in the
   future submitters would make an attempt to invest a little work it takes
   to keep their submitted code alive ...

  Ralf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>