Nouveau - Sep 2024 - [RFC 00/29] Introduce NVIDIA GPU Virtualization (vGPU) Support

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 11:40:57AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 02:54:38PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > 
> > No, I do object to "we are ignoring the driver being proposed by
the
> > developers involved for this hardware by adding to the old one
instead"
> > which it seems like is happening here.
> 
> That is too harsh. We've consistently taken a community position that
> OOT stuff doesn't matter, and yes that includes OOT stuff that people
> we trust and respect are working on. Until it is ready for submission,
> and ideally merged, it is an unknown quantity. Good well meaning
> people routinely drop their projects, good projects run into
> unexpected roadblocks, and life happens.
That's not the point -- at least it never was my point.

Upstream has set a strategy, and it's totally fine to raise concerns,
discuss
them, look for solutions, draw conclusions and do adjustments where needed.

But, we have to agree on a long term strategy and work towards the corresponding
goals *together*.

I don't want to end up in a situation where everyone just does their own
thing.

So, when you say things like "go do Nova, have fun", it really just
sounds like
as if you just want to do your own thing and ignore the existing upstream
strategy instead of collaborate and shape it.

On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 12:42:56AM +0200, Danilo Krummrich
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 11:40:57AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 02:54:38PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > 
> > > No, I do object to "we are ignoring the driver being
proposed by the
> > > developers involved for this hardware by adding to the old one
instead"
> > > which it seems like is happening here.
> > 
> > That is too harsh. We've consistently taken a community position
that
> > OOT stuff doesn't matter, and yes that includes OOT stuff that
people
> > we trust and respect are working on. Until it is ready for submission,
> > and ideally merged, it is an unknown quantity. Good well meaning
> > people routinely drop their projects, good projects run into
> > unexpected roadblocks, and life happens.
> 
> That's not the point -- at least it never was my point.
> 
> Upstream has set a strategy, and it's totally fine to raise concerns,
discuss
> them, look for solutions, draw conclusions and do adjustments where needed.
We don't really do strategy in the kernel. This language is a bit
off putting. Linux runs on community consensus and if any strategy
exists it is reflected by the code actually merged.

When you say things like this it comes across as though you are
implying there are two tiers to the community. Ie those that set the
strategy and those that don't.
> But, we have to agree on a long term strategy and work towards the
corresponding
> goals *together*.
I think we went over all the options already. IMHO the right one is
for nova and vfio to share some kind of core driver. The choice of
Rust for nova complicates planning this, but it doesn't mean anyone is
saying no to it.

My main point is when this switches from VFIO on nouveau to VFIO on
Nova is something that needs to be a mutual decision with the VFIO
side and user community as well.
> So, when you say things like "go do Nova, have fun", it really
just sounds like
> as if you just want to do your own thing and ignore the existing upstream
> strategy instead of collaborate and shape it.
I am saying I have no interest in interfering with your
project. Really, I read your responses as though you feel Nova is
under attack and I'm trying hard to say that is not at all my
intention.

Jason