From: Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson@atmel.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Architecture specific patches for kernel-headers?
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:06:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00ee01c96059$0ab8aa40$ae3118ac@Glamdring> (raw)
In order to avoid cluttering the toolchain/kernel-headers directory
the target/device/Atmel/ directory contains two subdirs
for at91 and avr32 specific patches. "arch-at91" and "arch-avr32".
These patches are not applied when the kernel headers are built
and I discussed this with Hans Christian Egtvedt
which has put the AVR32 specific patches in toolchain/kernel-headers.
I am worried that this directory will get cluttered with this approach.
I can see a couple of ways to handle this.
1) Create toolchain/kernel-headers/arch/arch-at91
and toolchain/kernel-headers/arch/arch-avr32 etc.
and patch from there.
2) Do the same as target/linux/Makefile.advanced
and add a conditional patch to the kernel-headers Makefile based on
$(KERNEL_ARCH_PATCH_DIR)
3) Just put it in the toolchain/kernel directory risking
that there will be several conflicting patches
in the future.
If someone updates the kernel-header version
to a newer kernel, the patches will be ignored
until someone updates them.
4) Set KERNEL_HEADERS_PATCH_DIR to
KERNEL_ARCH_PATCH_DIR,
We have to be careful, because the user might want
to build a new kernel where the patches cannot be
applied to both the kernel header source and the
kernel actually built
5) ?
In the arch-at91 and arch-avr32 you have to explicitly enable the patches.
The reasoning behind this is that a patch that applies
to 2.6.27.3 may not apply to 2.6.27.6 so you cannot
just apply the patch and hope for the best, based on
the major number.
If you base yourself on the major/minor number
combination, you are very restrictive.
A patch might work from 2.6.27.4 to 2.6.27.9 without problems
and there is no reason to restrict this more than neccessary.
The way it is done now, there are a number of patches
and if you have a supported major/minor version, then
you get this patchset as a default, but you can select
to use this patchset if you have another kernel version.
Would appreciate people's thinking here.
Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson
next reply other threads:[~2008-12-17 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-17 15:06 Ulf Samuelsson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-12-17 14:55 [Buildroot] Architecture specific patches for kernel-headers? Ulf Samuelsson
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='00ee01c96059$0ab8aa40$ae3118ac@Glamdring' \
--to=ulf.samuelsson@atmel.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox