From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f178.google.com (mail-pl1-f178.google.com [209.85.214.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6332614A81 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 19:29:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pl1-f178.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1bdb7b0c8afso2163935ad.3 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:29:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1692905376; x=1693510176; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jOX7PbHhMRFdG/jllgUmwKtu84TtzXPhLDJRoreAKhU=; b=fdcGZn56lTfCa8S2C69beD96MMaDKft7XgjZrQlmAnLCe+V4njtHU+0D6DWD+jeno4 S4RxdEo+IS98UkBEud2glKYJygFl1z6l6Qdxd0TwqwbCy54FCDsRvkeALsHGKDoBG7BK Y2whnIidbzZrC3Sb86hca8pblhQyiOriiwoLhLLb/iezwS8lm/ZOlRCJNAHsRPBnZYX6 4/aqQa4p9nXU98+vCR9Dusyl+an3pZ0bXpvQYr0cghY51JZ57jdvIybwyXBec6QyeTO5 x2UIn/jEPH4vV/Ad1rH96ZjlPY6LZkTNHPfKL6NZr3C68NSxhaJavQyRo6e0t4fvzD9A cGmg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx1t1ZKNmzmEimmhLXm09iF0U9gjeui4f2DM6qEnoyC32TdCeY7 JwkwIepjTqZwv1lWPL0cHxg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHRJ7G+9jDizAbObbHMgLbaWlqspuPwhDju8OZUfaBqWIvdrMLfCYMjsSTGIbrKhXrRdISHZQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:44f:b0:1bc:682a:b130 with SMTP id iw15-20020a170903044f00b001bc682ab130mr13431754plb.27.1692905376391; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:29:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2620:15c:211:201:e6ec:4683:972:2d78? ([2620:15c:211:201:e6ec:4683:972:2d78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t8-20020a1709027fc800b001bdcafcf8d3sm32847plb.69.2023.08.24.12.29.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:29:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6c140552-9c1c-5038-35b3-443d60de31f1@acm.org> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:29:34 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.1 Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Between a rock and a hard place, managing expectations... Content-Language: en-US To: "Bird, Tim" , Mark Brown , Linus Walleij Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Laurent Pinchart , Greg KH , Dan Williams , "ksummit@lists.linux.dev" References: <64e404a979f54_4c1f3294d3@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch> <2023082250-replace-rectangle-1d47@gregkh> <20230822142913.GB14596@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/24/23 10:20, Bird, Tim wrote: > Sony has had experiences where GKI prevented us from making changes > to the kernel to address issues raised in carrier certification, > causing delays and extra (very funky) workarounds, since we couldn't > change kernel code directly. Google is not very responsive to > non-top-tier phone vendors, and using GKI you are essentially at > their mercy. GKI, for us, removed some of the value of open source > (ie, the ability to modify the source to suit our needs). Since I'm a Google employee: can you give an example of Google not being very responsive, e.g. a bug number or patch URL? All the phone vendor requests I have seen are processed in a reasonable time. The quality of the Android kernel patches that I have seen and that are sent directly to Google is often low. Sometimes there is no other way to describe these as a nightmare from the point of view of code maintenance. The GKI indeed makes changes to the core kernel harder after its API has been frozen. Does carrier certification really require changes to the core kernel? Thanks, Bart.