Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Qualcomm Cloud AI 100 driver | From | Jeffrey Hugo <> | Date | Tue, 19 May 2020 12:07:03 -0600 |
| |
On 5/19/2020 11:41 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 08:57:38AM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: >> On 5/18/2020 11:08 PM, Dave Airlie wrote: >>> On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 00:12, Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Introduction: >>>> Qualcomm Cloud AI 100 is a PCIe adapter card which contains a dedicated >>>> SoC ASIC for the purpose of efficently running Deep Learning inference >>>> workloads in a data center environment. >>>> >>>> The offical press release can be found at - >>>> https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2019/04/09/qualcomm-brings-power-efficient-artificial-intelligence-inference >>>> >>>> The offical product website is - >>>> https://www.qualcomm.com/products/datacenter-artificial-intelligence >>>> >>>> At the time of the offical press release, numerious technology news sites >>>> also covered the product. Doing a search of your favorite site is likely >>>> to find their coverage of it. >>>> >>>> It is our goal to have the kernel driver for the product fully upstream. >>>> The purpose of this RFC is to start that process. We are still doing >>>> development (see below), and thus not quite looking to gain acceptance quite >>>> yet, but now that we have a working driver we beleive we are at the stage >>>> where meaningful conversation with the community can occur. >>> >>> >>> Hi Jeffery, >>> >>> Just wondering what the userspace/testing plans for this driver. >>> >>> This introduces a new user facing API for a device without pointers to >>> users or tests for that API. >> >> We have daily internal testing, although I don't expect you to take my word >> for that. >> >> I would like to get one of these devices into the hands of Linaro, so that >> it can be put into KernelCI. Similar to other Qualcomm products. I'm trying >> to convince the powers that be to make this happen. >> >> Regarding what the community could do on its own, everything but the Linux >> driver is considered proprietary - that includes the on device firmware and >> the entire userspace stack. This is a decision above my pay grade. > > Ok, that's a decision you are going to have to push upward on, as we > really can't take this without a working, open, userspace.
Fair enough. I hope that your position may have made things easier for me.
I hope this doesn't widen the rift as it were, but what is the "bar" for this userspace?
Is a simple test application that adds two numbers on the hardware acceptable?
What is the bar "working"? I intend to satisfy this request in good faith, but I wonder, if no one has the hardware besides our customers, and possibly KernelCI, can you really say that I've provided a working userspace?
> Especially given the copyright owner of this code, that would be just > crazy and foolish to not have open userspace code as well. Firmware > would also be wonderful as well, go poke your lawyers about derivative > work issues and the like for fun conversations :)
Those are the kind of conversations I try to avoid :)
> So without that changed, I'm not going to take this, and push to object > that anyone else take this. > > I'm not going to be able to review any of this code anymore until that > changes, sorry. > > thanks, > > greg k-h >
-- Jeffrey Hugo Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
| |