Re: Request to integrate freescale i.mx 3.10.9-1.0.0 alpha release into dora branch of meta-fsl-arm

[Eric Nelson <eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com>]

Hi Otavio,

On 10/02/2013 06:55 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Diego <diego.ml@zoho.com> wrote:
>>> Otavio requested for the community to approve this change since the dora
>>> branch is being finalized in next 2 weeks.  I'll be upstreaming patches to
>>> master-next this week so they can be tested by end of the week.  Please
>>> reply to this email if you have a concern with integrating 3.10.9-1.0.0
>>> into the dora branch.
>>
>> Hi Lauren.
>>
>> I think there's no objection for merge if that won't be the default.
>>
>> What would be the kernel state for dora then?
>> - 3.0.35 with Vivante 4.6.9p12 patches as default
>> - 3.5.7 alpha2 as an option
>> - 3.10.9 alpha as an option
>>
>> Is that what you were thinking?
>
> I'd prefer to replace 3.5.7 with 3.10.9.
>
> When 3.10.9 turns GA we may make it default or not. 3.0.35 needs to be
> kept around due backward support.
>

Has anyone done a gap-analysis that shows which features
are available on 3.10?

We've been tracking the progress of our testing against
3.5.7 in this blog post, and there are significant gaps
in functionality for our boards vs. 3.0.35:

	http://boundarydevices.com/i-mx6-3-5-7

For us, the primary gaps are support for Solo/Dual-Lite
processor variants and camera/video input support.

It seems that the same sort of test is appropriate for
the Freescale boards.

OTOH, perhaps the quickest way to get the gaps fixed
is to jump...

Regards,


Eric