[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window
    On Friday 01 April 2011, Detlef Vollmann wrote:
    > On 04/01/11 16:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
    > > On Friday 01 April 2011, Detlef Vollmann wrote:
    > >> On 04/01/11 15:54, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
    > >
    > >>> 9. All interesting work is going into a handful of platforms, all of which
    > >>> are ARMv7 based.
    > >> Define interesting.
    > >
    > > The ones that are causing the churn that we're talking about.
    > > Platforms that have been working forever and only need to get
    > > the occasional bug fix are boring, i.e. not the problem.
    > In the ARM tree I only know mach-at91.
    > Atmel still introduces new SOCs based on ARM926EJ-S, and that makes
    > perfect sense for lots of applications.

    I thought new ones were generally Cortex-M3 based. Either way, even
    if there are exceptions, focusing on ARMv7 at first should give
    a good representation of the new development.

    > >>> 12. Supporting many different boards with a single kernel binary is a
    > >>> useful goal.
    > >> Generally not for embedded systems (for me, a mobile PDA/phone is just a
    > >> small computer with a crappy keyboard, but not an embedded system).
    > >
    > > True. For embedded, this would not be an important thing to do, but
    > > also not hurt.
    > It costs you flash space.

    Well, the idea was not to force everyone to enable all options. When this
    is done right, the kernel would not be any bigger.

    > >>> * Strictly no crap
    > >>> * No board files
    > >> Where do you put code that needs to run very early (e.g. pinging the
    > >> watchdog)?
    > >
    > > Don't know. I'd hope we can get fast enough to the phase where device
    > > drivers get initialized.
    > Nope, never happened for me :-(
    > (Watchdog timeouts are often 1s or less.)

    1s is a long time. Most of the boot process is drivers anyway, so we
    just need to make sure that the watchdog is early enough.

    > > I believe that rule is generally accepted today, but we don't always
    > > enforce it.
    > Without device tree, Kconfig option is the only way that really
    > works today (no runtime HW detection, and same board ID with different
    > setups).

    I believe that has never been an accepted way of doing things, you are
    supposed to get a new board ID for every new board, hence the name ;-).


     \ /
      Last update: 2011-04-01 17:53    [W:0.023 / U:8.440 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site