[PATCH 0/3] drm/amdgpu: enable DKMS build

[Zhou, Jammy]

Thanks all for the comments. The simple changes in this series are just to use relative paths as Christian mentioned. It can also be helpful if some users want to try amdgpu driver from latest upstream on some systems with relatively older kernel installed, in which case the Dynamic Kernel Module Support mechanism is used.

Regards,
Jammy

-----Original Message-----
From: dri-devel [mailto:dri-devel-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Vetter
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 6:34 PM
To: Christian König
Cc: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] drm/amdgpu: enable DKMS build

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:08:07AM +0100, Christian König wrote:
> On 24.11.2015 10:36, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 09:59:09AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >>On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 04:55:19PM +0800, Jammy Zhou wrote:
> >>>This series enable the DKMS build of amdgpu driver.
> >>For the curious: What's DKMS?
> >I believe in this context it's "Dynamic Kernel Module Support":
> >
> >	https://wiki.debian.org/KernelDKMS
> 
> Yeah, correct.
> 
> >
> >I'm somewhat surprised that one would have to do something special to 
> >the kernel build system to "enable" such a build. But perhaps this is 
> >completely unrelated.
> 
> I'm a bit torn apart on this. On the one hand I'm not sure if we have 
> drivers upstream explicitly supporting this as well?
> 
> On the other hand it's just the Makefiles which need to be written in 
> a way which makes them relocatable. E.g. no absolute path like 
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/... in them and that's a good idea anyway.
> 
> Maybe just changing the commit message to "don't use absolute paths in 
> the makefiles" would be sufficient?

Oh I don't mind DKMS support, it makes sense to allow amd to use upstream as the baseline for their enhanced blob driver stack. Just wanted to know what it is. Imo what we shouldn't merge upstream would be compat code to allow amdgpu to be built on old kernels, since that's a lot more invasive than a few Makefile changes. Otoh that problem is largely address with the linux backporting project, which solves the "new driver directoy in old sources problem". So as long as it's just about building free-standing I think it's perfectly fine.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel