From: Bob Cochran <yocto@mindchasers.com>
To: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@gmail.com>
Cc: Yocto discussion list <yocto@yoctoproject.org>
Subject: Re: Development of Yocto Project Kernel outside of Intel?
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:59:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52DD47DD.8080706@mindchasers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADkTA4Pxv1hnjxMW4b7yy3Q1-xn2scMROyU2ZaLmZ_i_R+VLQQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 12/23/2013 09:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> I can add a few thoughts.
>
> We obviously have the reference BSPs to represent the major architectures, and
> on the linux-yocto mailing list, we've been looking at BSPs from LSI as well as
> some other pending boards (I'm waiting on them to be submitted, so I
> won't mention
> them here). The xilinx boards also have some yocto-style support in
> their repository
> with us working to adopt and integrated version of them as we move
> into Yocto 1.6+.
>
> It's generally a slow process to get kernel versions aligned, but with
> the LF LTSI
> kernel(s), it helps create a neutral version that the Yocto project,
> OSVs, semis and
> others can use as a synchronization point. LTSI is part of the
> linux-yocto kernel
> trees as an integrated baseline, and LTSI has recently picked up more
> attention ..
> which has a byproduct of more BSPs being available in a similar
> format, version and
> configuration.
>
> Obviously we'd also love to see all relevant BSPs completely
> mainlined, with short
> stays in the Yocto tree (or others) as a BSP is developed, stabilized
> and eventually
> upstreamed.
>
> There's obviously a place for cutting edge trees, semi trees for the
> latest and greatest,
> stable trees .. and integrated staging grounds for all of the above.
> So navigating that
> mix, takes time, and we are getting there.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
Hi Bruce (& other yocto developers),
Thank you for the information. Below is a related follow on question,
as I try to sort out who's doing what with kernel patches for the
varying embedded system chips / SoCs:
To what extent do kernel patches exist for Intel chip sets that are
released to embedded Intel customers but aren't yet posted as patches in
the yocto kernels? I assume there are proprietary drivers for IP
covered under NDA. Is this the case? Does an Intel customer find
themselves picking some kernel patches from the linux-yocto branches and
others from login protected Intel sites?
Thank you,
Bob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-20 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-23 17:58 Development of Yocto Project Kernel outside of Intel? Bob Cochran
2013-12-24 2:10 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-01-20 15:59 ` Bob Cochran [this message]
2014-01-20 17:23 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-01-20 17:43 ` Darren Hart
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-12-23 18:31 Edward Vidal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52DD47DD.8080706@mindchasers.com \
--to=yocto@mindchasers.com \
--cc=bruce.ashfield@gmail.com \
--cc=yocto@yoctoproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.