From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4F0B90C6.8040007@domain.hid>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:13:42 -0500
From: Mitchell Tasman <tasman@domain.hid>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel?
List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai
	<xenomai.xenomai.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.gna.org/options/xenomai-help>,
	<mailto:xenomai-help-request@domain.hid>
List-Archive: </public/xenomai-help>
List-Post: <mailto:xenomai@xenomai.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xenomai-help-request@domain.hid>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help>,
	<mailto:xenomai-help-request@domain.hid>
To: xenomai@xenomai.org

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.