From: "Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>
To: kernelci@groups.io
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [kernelci] add a new config fragment to kernel/configs
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 15:05:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181015140536.GC12949@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP71WjywZ=iqwZCTEYB7XjhO=r+hXhVzzjiS+XjztgGrK9HOOg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1224 bytes --]
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 03:40:20PM +0200, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 3:29 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 03:01:34PM +0200, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > > Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> writes:
> > > Personally, I think we should first try the "allmodconfig +
> > > min_boot.config" approach.
> > > If that works, would we still need all_abi.config?
> how about making a new tree (in kernelci.org?) that contains "test"
> config fragments and maintain them outside of linux master?
> kernelci.org could decide which fragment to use for which 'build'. If
> some fragments are good enough for mainline, then we might end up
> trying to upstream them at some point. That would at least ensure that
> everything is properly archived and reproducible. We can mimic what
> AOSP is doing for their custom config fragments
> (https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/configs/+/master).
The problem is more figuring out which config fragments we need rather
than where to host them. The thinking with pushing it upstream was that
there's been some interest in collaboration with other people doing test
stuff and there's no particular advantage to having a separate repo.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-15 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-12 9:28 add a new config fragment to kernel/configs Anders Roxell
2018-10-12 12:57 ` [kernelci] " Kevin Hilman
2018-10-12 16:39 ` Mark Brown
2018-10-15 13:01 ` Kevin Hilman
2018-10-15 13:29 ` Mark Brown
2018-10-15 13:40 ` Nicolas Dechesne
2018-10-15 14:05 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2018-10-30 17:21 ` Guillaume Tucker
2018-10-31 0:10 ` Kevin Hilman
2018-10-31 7:21 ` Anders Roxell
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=20181015140536.GC12949@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=anders.roxell@linaro.org \
--cc=kernelci@groups.io \
--cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
/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