linuxppc_2_4_devel vs MontaVista STB3xxxx kernel

linuxppc_2_4_devel vs MontaVista STB3xxxx kernel

[Phillip Lougher]

Hi,

I have been working on the MontaVista 2_4_2 STB3xxx kernel (the 'official'
kernel for the board).  I have, however, recently downloaded the
2_4_devel kernel.  This appears to now have quite mature support for the
STB3xxx (aka Redwood-4) and the Oak board (403GCX).  I downloaded the
2_4_devel kernel a few months ago, and it then certainly didn't work on
the STB3xxx.

I am now left wondering whether it may be better to move over to
the 2_4_devel kernel for the STB3xxxx and for further kernel
work I need to do for different 4xx chips.  I have specifically the
following questions:

1.  Does the 2_4_devel kernel work on the STB3xxx?
2.  Does the 2_4_devel kernel work on the 403GCX (Oak)?

Obviously, you may wonder, why don't I simply compile it and test.
However, I need to alter the 2_4_devel kernel to run on our
STB3xxxx boards (specifically the bootloader, as the treeboot loader
cannot be used).  Being very pushed for time (I need to get a new kernel
working in < 3 weeks),  I cannot afford to alter the 2_4_devel kernel in
the hope it will work.

The 2_4_2 MontaVista kernel has the advantage that I'm very familiar
with the low-level 4xx stuff, the 2_4_devel is an unknown.  However,
the 2_4_devel kernel certainly seems more mature in respect to the
cleaner integration of 405/403 implementation differences.

Thanks for any advice.

Phillip

----
Phillip Lougher
Zarlink Semiconductor,
Portskewitt, Wales.


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: linuxppc_2_4_devel vs MontaVista STB3xxxx kernel

[Dan Malek]

Phillip Lougher wrote:


> I am now left wondering whether it may be better to move over to
> the 2_4_devel kernel for the STB3xxxx and for further kernel
> work I need to do for different 4xx chips.

It depends upon what kind of support you want.  If you want to do
everything yourself and hope some of your questions are answered here,
then the _devel kernel is probably OK.  If you want real Linux
technicians dedicated to answer your questions and provide help when
you ask then the MontaVista subscription is for you.  Also, IBM
provides drivers only to STB customers for all of their specialty
peripherals in the chips.  These drivers and other software are only
available with the MontaVista distribution, we don't have access to
this or ability to maintain them in the public sources.

The boards containing STB processors aren't generally available. All of
the software in the public _devel tree is courtesy of MontaVista
employees as their time permits.  You may have to contribute and test
changes to keep the public tree up to date.

Thanks.


	-- Dan


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/