1 files changed, 231 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/wiki/Chat_log/20180809-core-chatlog b/wiki/Chat_log/20180809-core-chatlog
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..50e210d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/wiki/Chat_log/20180809-core-chatlog
@@ -0,0 +1,231 @@
+Core-chat-meeting-2018-08-09
+
+09:31 < geertu> Welcome to today's Core Group Chat!
+09:31 < geertu> Agenda:
+09:31 < geertu> 1. Status Updates
+09:31 < geertu> 2. Discussion Topics
+09:31 < geertu> Topic 1. Status updates
+09:31 < geertu> nA) What have we done since last time:
+09:31 < geertu> Marek worked on U-Boot (USB VBUS and PHY on Gen2, HS400 on Gen3) and Linux
+09:31 < geertu> (PCIe L0s/L1 handling on Gen3).
+09:31 < geertu> Morimoto-san worked on PeriJect and Ebisu-4D export.
+09:31 < geertu> Shimoda-san submitted PWM patches, and provided LTSI v4.14 snapshot
+09:31 < geertu> feedback.
+09:31 < geertu> Geert submmited v2 of R-Car gen3 OSC and RCLK improvements, reviewed lots
+09:31 < geertu> of patches, enabled the Global Timer on Cortex-A9 MPCore SoCs,
+09:31 < geertu> sub-maintained LSTI, and started looking into QEMU GPIO handling.
+09:32 < geertu> B) What we plan to do till next time:
+09:32 < geertu> Kaneko-san will test the M3-N CPUFreq upport.
+09:32 < geertu> Marek will continue U-Boot SDHI HS400 support.
+09:32 < geertu> Morimoto-san will ship Ebisu-4D boards.
+09:32 < geertu> Shimoda-san will check the new LTSI v4.14 snapshot test results from the
+09:32 < geertu> RVC test team, and will pave the way forward for IPMMU.
+09:32 < geertu> Geert will review LTSI submissions during the merge window.
+09:33 < geertu> C) Problems we have currently:
+09:33 < geertu> Linus postponed v4.18 by one week, conflicting with Geert's holiday
+09:33 < geertu> schedule.  Hence next renesas-drivers release will be
+09:33 < geertu> renesas-drivers-2018-08-21-v4.18.
+09:33 < geertu> Anything I missed?
+09:34 < geertu> s/submmited/submitted/
+09:35 < geertu> Lazy Summer (although it's a lot colder again)...
+09:35 < Marex> geertu: well, HS400 in U-Boot is dragging on because the MMC maintainer is horribly slow to respond ... I might need to bypass him again at some point
+09:35 < geertu> Marex: I'm sure you'll handle that fine
+09:35 < horms> ... and for the same reasons my LTSI submission will be up to v4.18-rc8 rather than v4.18
+09:36 < Marex> geertu: just like last time ... sadly ... we might be looking for a new mmc maintainer ;-)
+09:36 < geertu> horms: Np, as v4.18 will (should) be released long before the LTSI merge window closes
+09:36 < horms> not before the end of this week which is when I will be sending the next round of patches
+09:36 < horms> before my holiday next week
+09:37 < horms> otherwise it all falls to the last week of the merge window and the wheels could easily fall off at that point
+09:37 < horms> I will follow-up with any patches added between v4.18-rc8 and v4.18
+09:37 < geertu> horms: Postponing to the last week makes it more difficult for Intel to try to counter Renesas again ;-)
+09:38 < horms> That is true
+09:38 < geertu> (although they already know our plan anyway)
+09:38 < geertu> Topic 2. Discussion Topics
+09:38 < horms> But I'd rather de-risk other parts aspects of the project
+09:39 < geertu> horms: Sure, thx a lot!
+09:39 < geertu> morimoto: periject?
+09:39 < wsa> what's with that Intel vs Renesas talk?
+09:40 < horms> wsa: its a story from many years ago
+09:40 < morimoto> geertu: sorry I didn't read text, but periject what ?
+09:40 < horms> wsa: whereby there were two major contributors to LTSI. Renesas and Intel. And magically Intel had slightly more patches than Renesas
+09:40 < geertu> wsa: Intel ended up backporting ca. 3 more patches than Renesas
+09:41 < geertu> morimoto: Can we discuss periject?
+09:41 < wsa> so they could claim #1
+09:41 < wsa> ?
+09:41 < horms> They also caused a hidious conflict with our work
+09:41 < horms> wsa: yes, that is the theory
+09:42 < morimoto> geertu: yes
+09:42 < wsa> horms: bastards, I will only buy AMD cpus from now on!
+09:42 < wsa> ;)
+09:42 < horms> wsa: I got over it in time
+09:43 < wsa> "There is no politics in open source"
+09:44 < geertu> morimoto: The mic is yours!
+09:44 < morimoto> thanks.
+09:45 < morimoto> As you know I already posted periject on gitlab. you can try it.
+09:45 < morimoto> I think "tool feature" is not yet 100% but almost OK
+09:45 < geertu> morimoto: You have rebased the master branch?
+09:45 < morimoto> Ah... yes
+09:46 < morimoto> sorry, it is still v0.x version
+09:46 < morimoto> After v1.0, I will not
+09:46 < pinchartl> if I may chime in on this topic (being the main source of controversy...)
+09:46 < pinchartl> I think we still haven't agreed on the development process
+09:46 < pinchartl> and I don't see how we can build a tool to support a process if we don't define the process first
+09:47 < pinchartl> that's been my issue since the beginning
+09:47 < pinchartl> the face to face discussion Morimoto-san and I had in Tokyo answered lots of my questions
+09:47 < pinchartl> and I tried to summarize the process discussions on the periperi mailing list
+09:47 < pinchartl> but the mail thread quickly died
+09:47 < pinchartl> to word this differently, I think we need to agree about what we want to do before doing it
+09:48 < morimoto> 1 question. what is your problem ??
+09:49 < wsa> what are the open questions there? I am fine with trying morimoto-san's tools for now...
+09:49 < damm> i think we should split the process discussion from the tool
+09:49 < damm> that said, i agree that process is important
+09:49 < pinchartl> morimoto: my issue is that we still don't know what we want to do
+09:49 < pinchartl> there have been lots of bikeshedding discussions about the tool
+09:50 < pinchartl> about the format of stored data
+09:50 < morimoto> OK, yes, let's split the topic
+09:50 < pinchartl> and other topics
+09:50 < pinchartl> and to answer those questions, we first need to know what we want to do
+09:50 < pinchartl> at the moment, I see a tool, and I have no idea how to use it
+09:50 < damm> i don't disagree
+09:50 < pinchartl> for instance
+09:50 < pinchartl> for your last report
+09:50 < pinchartl> you tried to use the tool to generate the e-mail
+09:51 < pinchartl> there were no B) and C)
+09:51 < pinchartl> which isn't surprising
+09:51 < wsa> we are at the tool level again
+09:51 < pinchartl> as the tool doesn't support tracking future work plans at a bi-weekly level
+09:51 < pinchartl> nor does it support tracking blockers
+09:51 < wsa> I agree that "reporting emails" should be maybe a second or third step for the tool
+09:51 < pinchartl> so, as an experiment, you tried adding that information to the task description
+09:51 < pinchartl> it then ended up in the generated report
+09:52 < pinchartl> but that's a hack
+09:52 < damm> but does it blend?
+09:52 < pinchartl> and if we start using a tool without knowing what we want to do it with
+09:52 < pinchartl> we'll keep making hacks like that
+09:52 < pinchartl> in different ways, for different people
+09:52 < pinchartl> it will quickly become unusable
+09:52 < wsa> we first need to deal with handling tasks, or?
+09:52 < pinchartl> personally speaking, the logical order would be
+09:53 < pinchartl> 1. what are the issues we have?
+09:53 < pinchartl> 2. how do we want to solve them?
+09:53 < pinchartl> 3. how do we implement tools to support that?
+09:53 < wsa> and I would still like to understand why we can't use the tool for that right now...
+09:53 < pinchartl> if we start by 3, then 2, then 1, I don't see how it could work :-)
+09:53 < morimoto> wsa: +1
+09:54 < morimoto> Many times I explain it ...
+09:54 < wsa> and I think it is not only about the issues we have but also about the issue Morimoto-san is having
+09:54 < wsa> issues
+09:54 < pinchartl> wsa: we have a mostly free-formed text format as a database. that won't work, we will end up with one format per person depending on personal preferences
+09:54 < damm> pinchartl: i thought that it was the germans that liked process and order?
+09:54 < pinchartl> see the discussion of 1 task per file vs. several tasks per file
+09:55 < pinchartl> or Morimoto-san's today's e-mail report with free-formed B) and C) in the task description
+09:55 < pinchartl> we haven't really started using this, and it's already forking :-)
+09:56 < damm> my opinion is that people should use the tools that they like
+09:56 < wsa> I do like processes, but there is just talk :)
+09:56 < pinchartl> at the moment I feel that we're being given a database engine and we're told it's our bug and task tracker
+09:56 < damm> but some interface/format is needed together with a known process
+09:57 < pinchartl> what I'd like to get is jira/bugzilla/whatever. not those tools in particular, but something that operates at a similar level. with a defined work flow
+09:57 < damm> how about the people that like processes come up with a process proposal?
+09:58 < damm> i am for sure in the process camp
+09:58 < damm> the we have a tool camp as well
+09:58 < pinchartl> damm: let me locate the e-mail thread
+09:58 < damm> once both are in semi-ok order we merge
+09:58 < morimoto> I explained many times, but, I can create "Tool", but, you can create "Rule"
+09:58 < damm> how many people are in the pro-process discussion camp?
+09:59 < kbingham> I'm in the ... I want something that works camp ...
+09:59 < damm> obviously not morimoto-san
+09:59 < wsa> okay, let me summarize my take:
+09:59 < pinchartl> morimoto: but my point is that the tool should be based on the rules, not the other way around
+09:59 < damm> obviously laurent likes process
+09:59 < kbingham> And ... I'm confused why we're writting our own tools when opensource tools already exist :)
+09:59 < morimoto> pinchartl: yes, and, no my opinion
+10:00 < morimoto> My opinion is like this
+10:00 < damm> kibingham: i guess we need to know which problem we are solving first
+10:00 < wsa> even the current process works for me as groupleader. not perfect, but works. I see Morimoto-san has problems reporting our progress upwards. I'd surely like to have this issue solved, it is important for all of us.
+10:01 < morimoto> You can use Emacs, or VIM. it is editor. but, what you can write is under your rule.
+10:01 < pinchartl> "Re: [periperi] Peri Tool Next" from "Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 05:27:30 +0300"
+10:01 < pinchartl> Message-ID: <2412691.0qdXsgRgLR@avalon>
+10:01 < wsa> I don't think I need details on this, because I'd think there is a lot of internal information and culture involved.
+10:01 < damm> so why can't we simply do a work split?
+10:01 < damm> break out the process discussion into a group that cares?
+10:02 < damm> and figure out what we _need_ to do
+10:02 < pinchartl> damm: that would work for me
+10:02 < damm> then we can apply that to tools or whatnot
+10:02 < damm> so currently the process group includes pinchartl and myself
+10:03 < morimoto> my opinion is, try 1st, fix 2nd, rule 3rd :)
+10:03 < damm> morimoto: that's why you are not in the process group =)
+10:03 < morimoto> ok :)
+10:03 < damm> morimoto: you are however very welcome to join if you'd like
+10:03 < morimoto> I still don't understand what is the issue...
+10:04 < damm> morimoto: you and i have discussed this before
+10:04 < pinchartl> morimoto: ok, to make it very simple, my first issue is that with today's version of the tool, file format and documentation, I have no idea how to use it
+10:04 < damm> if you get interested in the process let me know
+10:05 < damm> pinchartl: you and i are at the same wave length
+10:05 < morimoto> pinchartl: yeah, I don't know too. thus, it is "trial"
+10:05 < pinchartl> damm: I don't know if that's a good or bad thing :)
+10:05 < damm> but lets give morimoto-san freedom to poke around
+10:05 < pinchartl> morimoto: shouldn't the trial phase be done separately from the production phase ? :-)
+10:06 < damm> you are using process-think now =)
+10:06 < damm> lets take that elsewhere
+10:06 < morimoto> My opinion is,
+10:06 < wsa> damm: I assume you know what is needed from the Renesas side for that process?
+10:07 < damm> sort of
+10:07 < morimoto> we can use tool to get all information. But we don't know how many information we have or we need, so far
+10:07 < morimoto> So far I know is
+10:07 < morimoto> 1) task, 2) BSP list
+10:08 < morimoto> For each purpose, we can use 1) task/mm for example, 2) task/bsp, etc
+10:08 < morimoto> each folder has each rule
+10:08 < morimoto> few rule is it should use "clear Title", etc
+10:09 < morimoto> we can create each rule for each purpose / each folder
+10:09 < morimoto> Because of this, "tool" have limited rule
+10:10 < morimoto> If you want to have "fixed" fule/format, you can create it
+10:10 < morimoto> and force it by git hook ?
+10:10 < morimoto> it is operation rule, not tool rule
+10:10 < morimoto> this is my basic idea
+10:11 < pinchartl> morimoto: I think the tool should enforce operation rules. otherwise they won't be enforced, and the "database" will be "corrupted" all the time
+10:11 < damm> morimoto: this discussion is similar to someone wanting to cook a pancake and asks how to do it, but the answer is a swiss army knife. =)
+10:12 < morimoto> pinchartl: tool has operation rules. like "status:" tag
+10:12 < wsa> how urgent is all this?
+10:12 < morimoto> ? sorry, what does your "operation rule" ?
+10:12 < wsa> I am under the impression Morimoto-san may need the tool to create proper reports so we can be evaluated correctly
+10:12 < wsa> but i may be wrong
+10:13 < damm> wsa: i have my own tools to monitor upstream contribution rate for each group
+10:13 < pinchartl> wsa: I think you're right, but it's not just the tool that's needed for that, it's also the data. reports can't be created before we all start using the tool and keep the data up to date
+10:13 < morimoto> wsa: creating reports is option, not purpose
+10:13 < wsa> ok
+10:13 < wsa> that relieves me
+10:13 < damm> and to avoid spending time unwisely i don't bother you with that unless things are not progressing as expected
+10:14 < wsa> I have absolutely zero doubts in trusting Magnus and Laurent figuring out an awesome process...
+10:14 < damm> it would be interesting to hear how shimoda-san and morimoto-san would like to receive information how to handle those BSP upporting lists
+10:15 < wsa> ... yet they are both probably the busiest people we have?
+10:15 < damm> are we in a rush somehow?
+10:16 < wsa> that was my initial question. i thought so and I am happy I was wrong :)
+10:16 < pinchartl> wsa: I think we're all busy. I agree however that I might be one of the people who sometimes has the hardest time setting priorities straight :)
+10:16 < damm> pinchartl: it is good to see that someone cares
+10:16 < damm> pinchartl: shall we take that process discussion elsewhere?
+10:17 < pinchartl> and as we're all busy, if this new tools requires spending more time to keep data up to date, I'm pretty sure it won't happen. I don't see how it could be adopted unless it makes everybody's life easier
+10:17 < pinchartl> damm: sure. on the mailing list ? or do you have another preference ?
+10:18 < damm> pinchartl: lets use private email to schedule a video conference you and me
+10:19 < pinchartl> is anyone else interested ?
+10:20 < geertu> I'm interested in the outcome
+10:20 < kbingham> perhaps in the outcome of discussions :) - and the list of features required
+10:21 < pinchartl> alright
+10:21 < pinchartl> damm: seems like we have a date then :-)
+10:21 < damm> pinchartl: yay
+10:22 < pinchartl> ok, let's do that
+10:23 < wsa> damm: you have a second now to chat (IRC or Hangout)?
+10:25 < pinchartl> damm: mail sent
+10:26  * kbingham posts "PeriZilla" to "PeriPeri" and awaits to be laughed at 
+10:27 < pinchartl> damm: seems like our e-mails have crossed each other :)
+10:29 < geertu> kbingham: is there a perl-bugzilla, too?
+10:29 < kbingham> geertu, If not you could write one :D
+10:29  * geertu notices the similarities between peri and perl
+10:30 < uli_> geertu: bugzilla itself is written in perl; i'd be surprised if there weren't
+10:30 < geertu> Are we finished with core?
+10:30 < kbingham> geertu, https://devzing.com/blog/index.php/access-bugzilla-from-perl/
+10:30 < geertu> Any other topics to discuss?
+10:34 < wsa> damm: you have a second now to chat (IRC or Hangout)?
+10:34 < damm> wsa: hangouts pls
+10:34 < pinchartl> geertu: not for me. I'm fine proceeding with multimedia
+10:34 < geertu> OK.
+10:36 < geertu> Thanks for joining, and have a nice continued day.