[Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

[Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

[Mitchell Tasman]

Hi.  I saw the recent discussion regarding ARM I-pipe and 3.x, and am 
wondering if anyone can hazard a guess as to a timetable for 3.2 support?

For OMAP3, I've wondered what's considered the optimal kernel strategy: 
mainline, linux-omap, or an OMAPPSP branch of TI's linux-omap3 staging 
tree on Arago.  My understanding based on previous discussions is that 
for anything but mainline, a Xenomai user is on his or her own as far as 
adapting an ARM I-pipe patchset to the selected kernel.  And for 
mainline, one risks incomplete or incorrect OMAP3 support.  I presume 
that newer mainline kernel versions contain more complete/correct OMAP3 
support than do older ones; hence, my question about 3.2.

Thanks.

Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

[Gilles Chanteperdrix]

On 01/10/2012 02:13 AM, Mitchell Tasman wrote:
> Hi.  I saw the recent discussion regarding ARM I-pipe and 3.x, and am 
> wondering if anyone can hazard a guess as to a timetable for 3.2 support?

3.0 is on its way. 3.1 will be next because it is the first version to
support a new I-pipe architecture, so I was hoping to be able to skip 3.2...

> 
> For OMAP3, I've wondered what's considered the optimal kernel strategy: 
> mainline, linux-omap, or an OMAPPSP branch of TI's linux-omap3 staging 
> tree on Arago.  My understanding based on previous discussions is that 
> for anything but mainline, a Xenomai user is on his or her own as far as 
> adapting an ARM I-pipe patchset to the selected kernel.

It is true that we can not ship I-pipe patches for all the vendor
specific branches around, so you have to adapt the patch to the vendor
branch you want to use. But it is usually not a big deal.

-- 
                                                                Gilles.

Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

[Mitchell Tasman]

On 01/10/2012 03:14 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On 01/10/2012 02:13 AM, Mitchell Tasman wrote (in part):
>> Hi.  I saw the recent discussion regarding ARM I-pipe and 3.x, and am
>> wondering if anyone can hazard a guess as to a timetable for 3.2 support?
>
> 3.0 is on its way. 3.1 will be next because it is the first version to
> support a new I-pipe architecture, so I was hoping to be able to skip 3.2...

Thank you for your response to my question(s).  I noticed that an arm 
I-pipe patchset for 3.0.13 recently landed in git.

Might you consider making 3.2 the next target for arm I-pipe support 
rather than 3.1?  It seems that 3.1 is already being end-of-lifed, and 
e.g., that the RT-Preempt community has jumped directly from 3.0 to 3.2.

Thanks again and best regards.

Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

[babbittner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1435 bytes --]


 I vote for 3.1 support.  There is no 3.1 realtime alternative at this point.  It would be nice to get some realtime support for the BeagleBone which is on 3.1, probably for several months.

 

 <I apologize for the aol email, some day I'll get some real email.>


-----Original Message-----
From: Mitchell Tasman <tasman@domain.hid>
Cc: xenomai-help <xenomai@xenomai.org>
Sent: Wed, Jan 18, 2012 6:28 pm
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?


On 01/10/2012 03:14 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On 01/10/2012 02:13 AM, Mitchell Tasman wrote (in part):
>> Hi.  I saw the recent discussion regarding ARM I-pipe and 3.x, and am
>> wondering if anyone can hazard a guess as to a timetable for 3.2 support?
>
> 3.0 is on its way. 3.1 will be next because it is the first version to
> support a new I-pipe architecture, so I was hoping to be able to skip 3.2...

Thank you for your response to my question(s).  I noticed that an arm 
I-pipe patchset for 3.0.13 recently landed in git.

Might you consider making 3.2 the next target for arm I-pipe support 
rather than 3.1?  It seems that 3.1 is already being end-of-lifed, and 
e.g., that the RT-Preempt community has jumped directly from 3.0 to 3.2.

Thanks again and best regards.


_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
Xenomai-help@domain.hid
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help

 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2318 bytes --]

Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

[Terry Fryar]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1739 bytes --]

I second the vote for 3.1...in fact for beaglebone xenomai support as
well.....

  _____  

From: xenomai-help-bounces@domain.hid [mailto:xenomai-help-bounces@domain.hid] On
Behalf Of babbittner@domain.hid
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:53 AM
To: xenomai@xenomai.org
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?


I vote for 3.1 support.  There is no 3.1 realtime alternative at this point.
It would be nice to get some realtime support for the BeagleBone which is on
3.1, probably for several months.


<I apologize for the aol email, some day I'll get some real email.>


-----Original Message-----
From: Mitchell Tasman <tasman@domain.hid>
Cc: xenomai-help <xenomai@xenomai.org>
Sent: Wed, Jan 18, 2012 6:28 pm
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?


On 01/10/2012 03:14 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:

> On 01/10/2012 02:13 AM, Mitchell Tasman wrote (in part):

>> Hi.  I saw the recent discussion regarding ARM I-pipe and 3.x, and am

>> wondering if anyone can hazard a guess as to a timetable for 3.2 support?

>

> 3.0 is on its way. 3.1 will be next because it is the first version to

> support a new I-pipe architecture, so I was hoping to be able to skip
3.2...



Thank you for your response to my question(s).  I noticed that an arm 

I-pipe patchset for 3.0.13 recently landed in git.



Might you consider making 3.2 the next target for arm I-pipe support 

rather than 3.1?  It seems that 3.1 is already being end-of-lifed, and 

e.g., that the RT-Preempt community has jumped directly from 3.0 to 3.2.



Thanks again and best regards.





_______________________________________________

Xenomai-help mailing list

Xenomai-help@domain.hid

https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3096 bytes --]

Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

[Josh Karch]

I just picked up a Beaglebone and third the vote for Xenomai.  It would be great to get access to the PRUSS modules and generate hardware PWM as well from a real time perspective.
________________________________________
From: xenomai-help-bounces@domain.hid [xenomai-help-bounces@domain.hid] On Behalf Of Terry Fryar [terry.fryar@domain.hid]
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:43 AM
To: babbittner@domain.hid; xenomai@xenomai.org
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

I second the vote for 3.1...in fact for beaglebone xenomai support as well.....

________________________________
From: xenomai-help-bounces@domain.hid [mailto:xenomai-help-bounces@domain.hid] On Behalf Of babbittner@domain.hid
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:53 AM
To: xenomai@xenomai.org
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?

I vote for 3.1 support.  There is no 3.1 realtime alternative at this point.  It would be nice to get some realtime support for the BeagleBone which is on 3.1, probably for several months.

<I apologize for the aol email, some day I'll get some real email.>

-----Original Message-----
From: Mitchell Tasman <tasman@domain.hid>
Cc: xenomai-help <xenomai@xenomai.org>
Sent: Wed, Jan 18, 2012 6:28 pm
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?


On 01/10/2012 03:14 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On 01/10/2012 02:13 AM, Mitchell Tasman wrote (in part):
>> Hi.  I saw the recent discussion regarding ARM I-pipe and 3.x, and am
>> wondering if anyone can hazard a guess as to a timetable for 3.2 support?
>
> 3.0 is on its way. 3.1 will be next because it is the first version to
> support a new I-pipe architecture, so I was hoping to be able to skip 3.2...

Thank you for your response to my question(s).  I noticed that an arm
I-pipe patchset for 3.0.13 recently landed in git.

Might you consider making 3.2 the next target for arm I-pipe support
rather than 3.1?  It seems that 3.1 is already being end-of-lifed, and
e.g., that the RT-Preempt community has jumped directly from 3.0 to 3.2.

Thanks again and best regards.


_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
Xenomai-help@domain.hid
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help



IMPORTANT/CONFIDENTIAL: This message contains information from Frontier Wind LLC which may be privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, retention, archiving, or copying the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail.