All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Making ARM multiplatform kernels DT-only?
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 18:49:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201205041849.52046.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120504160545.GT27023@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk>

On Friday 04 May 2012, Wookey wrote:
> > This is very important because distros are obviously the primary consumer
> > of multiplatform builds (aside from build testing). The goal should very
> > much be to reduce the number of distinct kernels that folks like debian,
> > fedora or cyanogenmod have to build.
> 
> Just to be clear, we'd very much like to support more hardware, ideally
> 'everything a significant number of people have', but the overhead to
> the whole distro for each new kernel added to the build (for every
> upload, slowing and potentially breaking releases on all arches) is
> sufficiently high that we have been strict about what is supported. As
> a result a lot of people use Debian with non-distro kernels.

Right, and this is the main motivation behind starting the multiplatform
kernel anyway: supporting more hardware with fewer kernels. Other distros
already aim at supporting only one ARM kernel binary, like things are
on other architectures. One related issue is the kernel binary size, which
we haven't discussed here yet. If we want to build 200 board files into
the kernel, that alone becomes a burden, even if most of it can be discarded
from RAM after the initcalls are done. Supporting only DT-enabled machines
can significantly reduce the size while only reducing the number of supported
boards by a bit, I'd hope.

> Obviously missing things are tegra, dove/armada, omap4. Freerunner
> would have been nice a while back but probably a bit late now. 

I can think of a few more: vexpress would be nice for running something
useful inside of KVM when we get there, various samsung socs are used
in cheap tablet PCs, and stuff like highbank is becoming more relevant
for distros now on the server side.

> It's not clear to me how many omap platforms our 'omap' kernel
> actually serves in practice, and similarly for the other 'generic'
> kernels.
> 
> Obviously any and all progress in the direction of making existing
> coverage or expanded coverage easier/faster/more-reliable/simpler is
> very welcome. 

	Arnd

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Wookey <wookey@wookware.org>
Cc: "Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@linaro.org>,
	linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>
Subject: Re: Making ARM multiplatform kernels DT-only?
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 18:49:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201205041849.52046.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120504160545.GT27023@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk>

On Friday 04 May 2012, Wookey wrote:
> > This is very important because distros are obviously the primary consumer
> > of multiplatform builds (aside from build testing). The goal should very
> > much be to reduce the number of distinct kernels that folks like debian,
> > fedora or cyanogenmod have to build.
> 
> Just to be clear, we'd very much like to support more hardware, ideally
> 'everything a significant number of people have', but the overhead to
> the whole distro for each new kernel added to the build (for every
> upload, slowing and potentially breaking releases on all arches) is
> sufficiently high that we have been strict about what is supported. As
> a result a lot of people use Debian with non-distro kernels.

Right, and this is the main motivation behind starting the multiplatform
kernel anyway: supporting more hardware with fewer kernels. Other distros
already aim at supporting only one ARM kernel binary, like things are
on other architectures. One related issue is the kernel binary size, which
we haven't discussed here yet. If we want to build 200 board files into
the kernel, that alone becomes a burden, even if most of it can be discarded
from RAM after the initcalls are done. Supporting only DT-enabled machines
can significantly reduce the size while only reducing the number of supported
boards by a bit, I'd hope.

> Obviously missing things are tegra, dove/armada, omap4. Freerunner
> would have been nice a while back but probably a bit late now. 

I can think of a few more: vexpress would be nice for running something
useful inside of KVM when we get there, various samsung socs are used
in cheap tablet PCs, and stuff like highbank is becoming more relevant
for distros now on the server side.

> It's not clear to me how many omap platforms our 'omap' kernel
> actually serves in practice, and similarly for the other 'generic'
> kernels.
> 
> Obviously any and all progress in the direction of making existing
> coverage or expanded coverage easier/faster/more-reliable/simpler is
> very welcome. 

	Arnd


  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-04 18:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-03 13:50 Making ARM multiplatform kernels DT-only? Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-03 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-03 13:45 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-03 13:45   ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-03 14:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-03 14:04   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-03 13:52   ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-03 13:52     ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-04  6:31   ` Deepak Saxena
2012-05-04  6:31     ` Deepak Saxena
2012-05-04  7:27     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04  7:27       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 12:20   ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 12:20     ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 16:39     ` Rob Herring
2012-05-04 16:39       ` Rob Herring
2012-05-04 16:56       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 16:56         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 16:40         ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-04 16:40           ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-04 16:51         ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-04 16:51           ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2012-05-04 18:56       ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 18:56         ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-03 14:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-03 14:18   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-03 14:23   ` Magnus Damm
2012-05-03 14:23     ` Magnus Damm
2012-05-03 16:27   ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-03 16:27     ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04  9:22   ` Arnaud Patard (Rtp)
2012-05-04  9:22     ` Arnaud Patard
2012-05-04 12:34     ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 12:34       ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-10 10:55   ` Ben Dooks
2012-05-10 10:55     ` Ben Dooks
2012-05-10 11:02     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-10 11:02       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-03 14:46 ` Sascha Hauer
2012-05-03 14:46   ` Sascha Hauer
2012-05-04 16:24   ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 16:24     ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-05  8:09     ` Sascha Hauer
2012-05-05  8:09       ` Sascha Hauer
2012-05-05 13:17       ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-05 13:17         ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-14  8:54         ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-14  8:54           ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04  5:38 ` Deepak Saxena
2012-05-04  5:38   ` Deepak Saxena
2012-05-04  7:39   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04  7:39     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 14:20   ` Wookey
2012-05-04 14:20     ` Wookey
2012-05-04 14:35     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 14:35       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 15:17       ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 15:17         ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 16:05         ` Wookey
2012-05-04 16:05           ` Wookey
2012-05-04 18:49           ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2012-05-04 18:49             ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 20:03       ` Linus Walleij
2012-05-04 20:03         ` Linus Walleij
2012-05-04 20:42         ` Christian Robottom Reis
2012-05-04 20:42           ` Christian Robottom Reis
2012-05-04 21:05           ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 21:05             ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-05-04 22:43         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-05-04 22:43           ` Russell King - ARM Linux

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201205041849.52046.arnd@arndb.de \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.