From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4F0C9C25.5080401@domain.hid> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:14:29 +0100 From: Gilles Chanteperdrix MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4F0B90C6.8040007@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <4F0B90C6.8040007@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Arm support for 3.2 kernel? List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Mitchell Tasman Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org 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.