From: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] out of tree kernel patches question
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 09:02:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8760a8xber.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <trinity-7fff4d5c-60f2-49ab-834f-06fc54b81cdb-1510991266180@3c-app-mailcom-bs13> (daggs@gmx.com's message of "Sat, 18 Nov 2017 08:47:46 +0100")
>>>>> "daggs" == daggs <daggs@gmx.com> writes:
Hi,
>> Maybe it makes more sense to do it the other way around? First move to
>> the mainline kernel and once that is done move to mainline u-boot as
>> well. I've used 4.13 with the vendor u-boot without problems.
>>
>> The only issue I am aware of for moving to mainline u-boot was an issue
>> with HDMI output, as the driver assumed certain things were initialized
>> in the bootloader, which was true for the vendor one but not mainline -
>> But that is getting fixed:
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/10/17/134
>>
>> As for carrying patches in Buildroot - That is OK for me as long as they
>> are not huge and the patches are only temporary (E.G. patches have
>> already been submitted upstream and hopefully acked, but they just
>> haven't been merged yet).
>>
> as I wrote to Thomas, the main reason for this question is to remove
> the gcc 4.9.x constraint. without upgrading uboot, that cannot be
> dropped. I was working on upgrading the uboot while keeping the
> vendor's kernel but the board won't boot. afaics, uboot works, the
> issue is that the kernel doesn't gets loaded at all.
I get that, but preferably we want to use mainline u-boot AND kernel,
and if the combination of mainline-uboot + vendor-kernel doesn't work
then it makes more sense to do it the other way around.
--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-18 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-17 13:16 [Buildroot] out of tree kernel patches question daggs
2017-11-17 20:24 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2017-11-18 7:43 ` daggs
2017-11-18 8:26 ` Peter Korsgaard
2017-11-18 12:10 ` daggs
2017-11-20 20:34 ` daggs
2017-11-20 20:50 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2017-11-17 21:33 ` Peter Korsgaard
2017-11-18 7:47 ` daggs
2017-11-18 8:02 ` Peter Korsgaard [this message]
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=8760a8xber.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk \
--to=peter@korsgaard.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