From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <461CC0C4.2060000@domain.hid> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:04:36 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <305035a40704100947n5d426f9ahf8608957a2264f2f@domain.hid> <461BC626.3070403@domain.hid> <305035a40704110201i1ea65f11j162eecc46858f5ca@domain.hid> <461CA604.4050809@domain.hid> <305035a40704110221u348611ebs8fb73b7ddb0f8bd3@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <305035a40704110221u348611ebs8fb73b7ddb0f8bd3@domain.hid> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig85CC9498E79A8CC56261CC87" Sender: jan.kiszka@domain.hid Subject: Re: [Adeos-main] AT91SAM9261 adeos support for 2.6.19 kernel List-Id: General discussion about Adeos List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gregory CLEMENT Cc: BOUIN Alexandre , adeos-main@gna.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig85CC9498E79A8CC56261CC87 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > 2007/4/11, Gilles Chanteperdrix : >> Gregory CLEMENT wrote: >>> 2007/4/10, Gilles Chanteperdrix : >>> >>>> Gregory CLEMENT wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> We port the adeos-ipipe-2.6.19-arm-1.6-05.patch for AT91SAM9261. >>>>> >>>>> This patch must be applied on vanilla 2.6.19 with at91 patch ( >>>>> http://maxim.org.za/AT91RM9200/2.6/2.6.19-at91.patch.gz ) applied f= or >>>>> supporting AT91SAM9261. >>>>> So first get vanilla kernel, then apply at91 patch then apply our >>>>> patch instead of adeos-ipipe-2.6.19-arm-1.6-05.patch. >>>>> >>>>> For now it works with Xenomai on AT91SAM9261-EK, if someone is >>>>> intersting we can send the benchmark result. >>>>> As AT91SAM926x are pretty similar of AT91RM9200, there is a some >>>>> duplicate code and some common code. >>>>> In the future it could be also work on all AT91SAM926x, we can test= >>>>> it. But before going ahead we would like some comment on this patch= =2E >>>>> >>>>> The better would be working on 2.6.20 which already have support fo= r >>>>> AT91SAM926x, but we didn't see any arm patch on this kernel nor any= >>>>> file modified on git. >>>>> >>>>> Hope this patch will be usefull. >>>> It looks good. I will try and port the I-pipe patch for ARM to Linux= >>>> 2.6.20. In the meantime, could you separate the AT91SAM9261 specific= >>>> code and the changes (if any) made to the rest of the I-pipe from th= e >>>> rest of the I-pipe ? This would ease distribution and maintenance. >>> >>> OK I made a diff between our patch and >>> adeos-ipipe-2.6.19-arm-1.6-05.patch. I had to reworked our patch for >>> removing fake difference. >>> As you will see there is not many difference between the 2 patchs and= >>> we don't modify the rest of I-pipe. >>> There is also difference due to the fact that we made our patch on a >>> kernel patched with at91 whereas adeos patch was made on vanilla >>> kernel. >>> >>> As this diff file isn't really readeable, I can say that the main fil= e >>> we modified are: >>> * arch/arm/mach-at91rm9200/Kconfig >>> -> here we add support for AT91SAM9261 >>> >>> * arch/arm/mach-at91rm9200/at91sam9261.c >>> -> here we add support for TCB0 and modify interrupt priority in the >>> same way of AT91RM9200 >>> >>> * arch/arm/mach-at91rm9200/at91sam926x_time.c >>> -> and here we add the same code that was in >>> arch/arm/mach-at91rm9200/at91rm9200_time.c. As it is exactly the same= >>> code added as we use the same peripheral, maybe we can add a common >>> file ( an at91_ipipe_time.c), instead of having duplicated code. >> Sorry, I did not make myself clear, I would like a difference between >> the trees, not between the diffs. In other words, the modifications yo= u >> made. >=20 > Well this differences show the modification we made, but I agree it is > not really readable. >=20 > Between which tree do you want the diffs ? > Vanilla kernel +adeos patch and at91 patched kernel + our patch ? > With this you'll have a lot of at91 patch in it. >=20 > Maybe we can try to make a diff between > at91 patched kernel +adeos patch and at91 patched kernel + our patch ?= > But with this solution we have to made some modification on adeos > patch for applying it on at91 patched kernel. >=20 > Last solution is to attach the file modified. Already tried interdiff between to original ipipe patch and your version?= Jan --------------enig85CC9498E79A8CC56261CC87 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGHMDEniDOoMHTA+kRAn6BAKCBTxuFR65VhzsXyBqQ9e7KOsT6IgCfTMAf qLGtU0AOV6VIaFtDn13rmAU= =uQZw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig85CC9498E79A8CC56261CC87--