From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f180.google.com (mail-pd0-f180.google.com [209.85.192.180]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F5B0E015F8 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 07:52:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f180.google.com with SMTP id y10so1015515pdj.11 for ; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 07:52:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rDhYd72IoMW4/lr5p8XKM89yaIls+HGMC56V3T6PzxU=; b=WPrt04LcnIjkEsU3C/J7g733ZDuItrXcrANiJPpxWk7zaYGugI38XGLqmYde95Lxh2 AUpsaqNGk3x2foJjHSII1OdcMkCRgDkAVHQTJHOpgn1NN81XSLUbmfnnAODOpopSW1YD Ulv5fgMn9F6WPuj10jpZXbw84w/zcSxLxhCt6o5zOo7vpUOdNO/6Qm3gaLqHaa4MVaEl G6pRw6aUh4APelaxFmVMv/ECd7R9p2r3E+DyYxHGGuZDJrqYw9Tx5424+4vn9veJKBPk VVHqiMFv1a+jeme7ioO2Goj0+1YrXjcBFSx6cydsi9Brq2TA0p/RFwjH8E2DoLazIDbB 5mPA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmH+4eWiZ+l4ta7zrHtxFoeUNVNOrwL7XDpLJfZAA14m1BufQK2YXLnrno1js91MjYQX1G2 X-Received: by 10.66.102.100 with SMTP id fn4mr3640595pab.71.1380725520121; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 07:52:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] (ip98-167-230-131.ph.ph.cox.net. [98.167.230.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ef10sm4002469pac.1.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 02 Oct 2013 07:51:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <524C330B.4020404@boundarydevices.com> Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 07:51:55 -0700 From: Eric Nelson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daiane Angolini , Otavio Salvador , Diego References: <2BC32295742BF14CA5950C3659567EB677A2ED@039-SN1MPN1-003.039d.mgd.msft.net> <1412123.FJqSlycNOL@localhost.localdomain> <524C2625.2000109@freescale.com> In-Reply-To: <524C2625.2000109@freescale.com> Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: Request to integrate freescale i.mx 3.10.9-1.0.0 alpha release into dora branch of meta-fsl-arm X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 14:52:01 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/02/2013 06:56 AM, Daiane Angolini wrote: > On 10/02/2013 10:55 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Diego 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. > > +1 > -1 (comments below) >> >> When 3.10.9 turns GA we may make it default or not. 3.0.35 needs to be >> kept around due backward support. > > Do not forget that 3.10.9-1.0.0 is not only kernel. It's all BSP packages > Thanks for pointing this out. I had assumed backward-compatibility with 3.5.7/3.0.35_4.1.0 packages. Patches haven't yet been submitted for the other bits, have they? It would be really nice if this update came with a bit more commentary about ABI and functional compatibility rather than a single patch submission and a new branch magically appearing on git.freescale.com. I'd really like to see Dora become a stable platform for those wanting to test the full functionality of their boards. We never really had that for kernel versions 3.0.35_4.0.0, and only have that for 3.0.35_4.1.0 on Dora. If there isn't some form of PREFERRED_VERSION_ support for 3.0.35_4.1.0 that allows a stable, fully-functional build, I think that 3.10.9 should be pushed into either "master" or a "next" branch. What's more, I think it's very important for different boards to be able to specify which kernel version is recommended for each, since the efforts behind them progress along different time-lines. If we don't have the structure to support this, each board vendor will (and should) probably plan on forking meta-freescale for their own efforts, which would be a shame. Regards, Eric