[PATCH] drm/doc: More fine-tuning on userspace review requirements

[Daniel Vetter]

On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:07:12PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2019 10:48:49 +0200
> Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> 
> > With Eric's patch
> > 
> > commit ba6e798ecf320716780bb6a6088a8d17dcba1d49
> > Author: Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net>
> > Date:   Wed Apr 24 11:56:17 2019 -0700
> > 
> >     drm/doc: Document expectation that userspace review looks at kernel uAPI.
> > 
> > there's been concerns raised that we expect userspace people to do
> > in-depth kernel patch review. That's not reasonable, same way kernel
> > people can't review all the userspace we have. Try to clarify
> > expectations a bit more.
> > 
> > Cc: Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net>
> > Cc: Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com>
> > Cc: contact at emersion.fr
> > Cc: wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
> > index 05874d09820c..f368e58fb727 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
> > @@ -85,9 +85,9 @@ leads to a few additional requirements:
> >  - The userspace side must be fully reviewed and tested to the standards of that
> >    userspace project. For e.g. mesa this means piglit testcases and review on the
> >    mailing list. This is again to ensure that the new interface actually gets the
> > -  job done.  The userspace-side reviewer should also provide at least an
> > -  Acked-by on the kernel uAPI patch indicating that they've looked at how the
> > -  kernel side is implementing the new feature being used.
> > +  job done.  The userspace-side reviewer should also provide an Acked-by on the
> > +  kernel uAPI patch indicating that they believe the proposed uAPI is sound and
> > +  sufficiently documented and validated for userspace's consumption.
> >  
> >  - The userspace patches must be against the canonical upstream, not some vendor
> >    fork. This is to make sure that no one cheats on the review and testing
> 
> Thank you for clarifying this. I can work with that.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen at collabora.com>

Merged with Eric's irc-ack, thanks everyone for helping improve this text.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch