* Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform @ 2013-04-24 3:34 ` Olof Johansson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Olof Johansson @ 2013-04-24 3:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Kukjin Kim Arnd, I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works better, i.e. 3.11. First, the defconfig we have in our out-of-tree build system now builds a broken kernel since it doesn't set ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE. As a result, exynos gets turned off. It's quite awkward to switch between pre- and post-multiplatform configs, which makes bisecting and other error finding hard. I'm sure this will hit other downstream users too. What's even more frustrating is that I can't turn on DEBUG_LL, since serial drivers depend on PLAT_SAMSUNG, and that is no longer set. Seems like we'll have a really broken 3.10 if we merge what we have now. More bake time is definitely needed. :( -Olof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform @ 2013-04-24 3:34 ` Olof Johansson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Olof Johansson @ 2013-04-24 3:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Arnd, I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works better, i.e. 3.11. First, the defconfig we have in our out-of-tree build system now builds a broken kernel since it doesn't set ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE. As a result, exynos gets turned off. It's quite awkward to switch between pre- and post-multiplatform configs, which makes bisecting and other error finding hard. I'm sure this will hit other downstream users too. What's even more frustrating is that I can't turn on DEBUG_LL, since serial drivers depend on PLAT_SAMSUNG, and that is no longer set. Seems like we'll have a really broken 3.10 if we merge what we have now. More bake time is definitely needed. :( -Olof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform 2013-04-24 3:34 ` Olof Johansson @ 2013-04-24 15:03 ` Arnd Bergmann -1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2013-04-24 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olof Johansson Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Kukjin Kim On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: > I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works > better, i.e. 3.11. > > First, the defconfig we have in our out-of-tree build system now > builds a broken kernel since it doesn't set ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE. As a > result, exynos gets turned off. It's quite awkward to switch between > pre- and post-multiplatform configs, which makes bisecting and other > error finding hard. I'm sure this will hit other downstream users too. Hmm, good. point. The idea of the naming was that you actually /can/ go back and forth across that commit since ARCH_EXYNOS exists at all times, either as a standalone symbol or as part of multiplatform. Unfortunately, I did not consider that this stops working for bisection if we do the change and only make ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE work correctly but leave ARCH_EXYNOS as "depends on BROKEN" initially. I think you are right that we need to revert bd51de53e1b "ARM: exynos: enable multiplatform support" in the next/multiplatform branch, although I don't see a problem with the other commits there. > What's even more frustrating is that I can't turn on DEBUG_LL, since > serial drivers depend on PLAT_SAMSUNG, and that is no longer set. Are you sure? I don't see that problem. PLAT_SAMSUNG should still get set in both single- and multiplatform configurations, along with PLAT_SAMSUNG_SINGLE in the case of single-platform exynos. I've testing DEBUG_LL both in single and multi configurations on linux-next. > Seems like we'll have a really broken 3.10 if we merge what we have > now. More bake time is definitely needed. :( I think the problems with exynos are elsewhere at the moment, and Kukjin, Thomas, Tomasz and others have worked hard on getting those problems fixed. I would suggest we leave the "samsung/exynos-multiplatform" preparation series scheduled for the first set of pull requests in next/multiplatform but revert the bd51de53e1b commit in it. Once the dust settles in the merge window and the exynos multiplatform patches that are queued up in other trees (serial, spi, video, ...) have made it upstream, we can decide if the late/multiplatform series still looks scary or not. If you feel strongly about it and know that you don't want to merge it then, we can also drop the first part now. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform @ 2013-04-24 15:03 ` Arnd Bergmann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2013-04-24 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: > I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works > better, i.e. 3.11. > > First, the defconfig we have in our out-of-tree build system now > builds a broken kernel since it doesn't set ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE. As a > result, exynos gets turned off. It's quite awkward to switch between > pre- and post-multiplatform configs, which makes bisecting and other > error finding hard. I'm sure this will hit other downstream users too. Hmm, good. point. The idea of the naming was that you actually /can/ go back and forth across that commit since ARCH_EXYNOS exists at all times, either as a standalone symbol or as part of multiplatform. Unfortunately, I did not consider that this stops working for bisection if we do the change and only make ARCH_EXYNOS_SINGLE work correctly but leave ARCH_EXYNOS as "depends on BROKEN" initially. I think you are right that we need to revert bd51de53e1b "ARM: exynos: enable multiplatform support" in the next/multiplatform branch, although I don't see a problem with the other commits there. > What's even more frustrating is that I can't turn on DEBUG_LL, since > serial drivers depend on PLAT_SAMSUNG, and that is no longer set. Are you sure? I don't see that problem. PLAT_SAMSUNG should still get set in both single- and multiplatform configurations, along with PLAT_SAMSUNG_SINGLE in the case of single-platform exynos. I've testing DEBUG_LL both in single and multi configurations on linux-next. > Seems like we'll have a really broken 3.10 if we merge what we have > now. More bake time is definitely needed. :( I think the problems with exynos are elsewhere at the moment, and Kukjin, Thomas, Tomasz and others have worked hard on getting those problems fixed. I would suggest we leave the "samsung/exynos-multiplatform" preparation series scheduled for the first set of pull requests in next/multiplatform but revert the bd51de53e1b commit in it. Once the dust settles in the merge window and the exynos multiplatform patches that are queued up in other trees (serial, spi, video, ...) have made it upstream, we can decide if the late/multiplatform series still looks scary or not. If you feel strongly about it and know that you don't want to merge it then, we can also drop the first part now. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform 2013-04-24 15:03 ` Arnd Bergmann @ 2013-04-25 15:33 ` Kukjin Kim -1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2013-04-25 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Olof Johansson, Kukjin Kim, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On 04/25/13 00:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: >> I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works >> better, i.e. 3.11. >> I think, this would be better choice for now if it's not urgent... - Kukjin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform @ 2013-04-25 15:33 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2013-04-25 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On 04/25/13 00:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: >> I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works >> better, i.e. 3.11. >> I think, this would be better choice for now if it's not urgent... - Kukjin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform 2013-04-25 15:33 ` Kukjin Kim @ 2013-04-25 17:31 ` Arnd Bergmann -1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2013-04-25 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kukjin Kim Cc: Olof Johansson, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Thursday 25 April 2013, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > On 04/25/13 00:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: > >> I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works > >> better, i.e. 3.11. > >> > I think, this would be better choice for now if it's not urgent... > I spent a lot of time on it because it's a priority for Linaro, but that means I'm biased in the question of whether to merge it or not. It should only get in if you and Olof think it's a good idea. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform @ 2013-04-25 17:31 ` Arnd Bergmann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2013-04-25 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thursday 25 April 2013, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > On 04/25/13 00:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: > >> I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works > >> better, i.e. 3.11. > >> > I think, this would be better choice for now if it's not urgent... > I spent a lot of time on it because it's a priority for Linaro, but that means I'm biased in the question of whether to merge it or not. It should only get in if you and Olof think it's a good idea. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform 2013-04-25 17:31 ` Arnd Bergmann @ 2013-04-27 0:37 ` Olof Johansson -1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Olof Johansson @ 2013-04-27 0:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Kukjin Kim, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 07:31:24PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 25 April 2013, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > On 04/25/13 00:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: > > >> I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works > > >> better, i.e. 3.11. > > >> > > I think, this would be better choice for now if it's not urgent... > > > > I spent a lot of time on it because it's a priority for Linaro, but > that means I'm biased in the question of whether to merge it or not. > It should only get in if you and Olof think it's a good idea. I've reverted the commit you pointed out as the problematic one now, and with that I get a working setup. That means most of the base patches are in, just not the final Kconfig shuffling. 3.11 seems more realistic for that. -Olof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform @ 2013-04-27 0:37 ` Olof Johansson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Olof Johansson @ 2013-04-27 0:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 07:31:24PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 25 April 2013, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > On 04/25/13 00:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Wednesday 24 April 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: > > >> I think we should hold off on multiplatform for exynos until it works > > >> better, i.e. 3.11. > > >> > > I think, this would be better choice for now if it's not urgent... > > > > I spent a lot of time on it because it's a priority for Linaro, but > that means I'm biased in the question of whether to merge it or not. > It should only get in if you and Olof think it's a good idea. I've reverted the commit you pointed out as the problematic one now, and with that I get a working setup. That means most of the base patches are in, just not the final Kconfig shuffling. 3.11 seems more realistic for that. -Olof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-04-27 0:37 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-04-24 3:34 Exynos regressions w.r.t. config and debuggability due to multiplatform Olof Johansson 2013-04-24 3:34 ` Olof Johansson 2013-04-24 15:03 ` Arnd Bergmann 2013-04-24 15:03 ` Arnd Bergmann 2013-04-25 15:33 ` Kukjin Kim 2013-04-25 15:33 ` Kukjin Kim 2013-04-25 17:31 ` Arnd Bergmann 2013-04-25 17:31 ` Arnd Bergmann 2013-04-27 0:37 ` Olof Johansson 2013-04-27 0:37 ` Olof Johansson
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.