[Intel-xe] [PATCH] drm/doc/rfc/xe: No STAGING in drm.

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 03:57:12PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>We are not using the STAGING inside drm and the uAPI needs to be
>in the acceptable form before we get merged upstream.

Is this a change from i915, where the force_probe protection 
is sufficient?

The email exchange with Greg KH  highlighted that the use of STAGING
outside of staging dir doesn't really produce the desired effect*.
Would it be sufficient to taint the kernel with bit 10 or
create a dedicated taint for this case?

Lucas De Marchi

* The logic for adding the taint is in the module load code and is
   triggered for modules with MODULE_INFO(staging), automatically
   added by modpost for modules under drivers/staging

>
>Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/2023051029-overspend-sherry-1b85@gregkh/
>Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com>
>Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
>Cc: Oded Gabbay <ogabbay at kernel.org>
>Cc: Francois Dugast <francois.dugast at intel.com>
>Cc: Luis Strano <luis.strano at intel.com>
>Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost at intel.com>
>Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom at linux.intel.com>
>Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
>Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
>Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab at kernel.org>
>Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
>---
> Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst | 7 ++-----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
>index 2516fe141db6..8524095a54bd 100644
>--- a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
>+++ b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
>@@ -67,11 +67,8 @@ platforms.
>
> When the time comes for Xe, the protection will be lifted on Xe and kept in i915.
>
>-Xe driver will be protected with both STAGING Kconfig and force_probe. Changes in
>-the uAPI are expected while the driver is behind these protections. STAGING will
>-be removed when the driver uAPI gets to a mature state where we can guarantee the
>-‘no regression’ rule. Then force_probe will be lifted only for future platforms
>-that will be productized with Xe driver, but not with i915.
>+Xe driver will be protected with force_probe, which will be lifted only for
>+future platforms that will be productized with Xe driver, but not with i915.
>
> Xe – Pre-Merge Goals
> ====================
>-- 
>2.39.2
>