From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgI3S-0000bT-Lm for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 17:42:38 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qB5GSArP019897; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:28:10 GMT Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 19735-01; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:28:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qB5GS3Mh019891 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:28:04 GMT Message-ID: <1354724873.25268.119.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Tom Zanussi Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 16:27:53 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1354723571.1715.17.camel@empanada> References: <1354723571.1715.17.camel@empanada> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: dvhart@linux.intel.com, linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org, openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] linux-yocto: consolidated pull request X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 16:42:38 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 10:06 -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote: > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:48 +0000, Burton, Ross wrote: > > On 21 November 2012 21:32, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > > atom-pc should probably be using the 3.4 kernel, but that's a > > > question for Darren/Tom/Nitin (so I've added them to the cc), since > > > there may be a reason (with respect to graphics) as to why it is on > > > 3.0. > > > > Ping Darren/Tom/Nitin. > > > > atom-pc is certainly lagging behind by still being on 3.0, and I can't > > see any reason why we'd want to stick with 3.0 for graphics. In fact > > as the most common graphics driver used on atom-pc is a i965 we want a > > modern kernel as that is where the development is. > > > > I don't know of any technical reason for it to still be at 3.0. > > Until recently all of the 'core machines' were at 3.0 and probably the > assumption was that whoever upgraded those in the past would also be > upgrading atom-pc - has that changed?. > > So who does own the core machines and if that doesn't cover atom-pc, > then who owns that? As I understood it, WR owns the non-IA core machines, you (as in the Intel team) own the IA ones, namely atom-pc. Cheers, Richard