Steve Spano wrote:
Hi Dirk,
Thanks for the detailed response!
I have downloaded the git kernel and it runs on the FALCON, but I
haven't yet tried to compile the DVEVM evaluation codecs against it.
From looking through the lists, it seems as if there are problems with
using the git kernel and the DVEVM eval codecs - is this true?
I don't now, I never tried it. But most probably (if the list archives
tells so) I would assume that some adaptions will be necessary. See
below...
The s/w that plans to ship with the FALCON is intended to basically
duplicate the DVEVM functions (i.e. let the codecs work etc). Then folks
can customize it from there.
I'd also like to get gstreamer running on the FALCON as well.
Does this mean "... running on the FALCON with git kernel..."?
If yes, then I think it is time to try to get the issues with DVEVM
eval codecs, gstreamer and git kernel solved now. Together. Let us
start a seperate thread for this with better subject and see how far
we will come.
Regards
Dirk
-----Original Message-----
From: Dirk Behme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 2:52 PM
To: Steve Spano
Cc: [email protected]; Kevin Hilman
Subject: Re: ### Patchset for FLE FALCON
Steve Spano wrote:
Hello Folks,
We have a patchset that will be released shortly against the
MontaVista
kernel from the DVEVM and the git U-BOOT.
The patchset will add support for the FLE FALCON, which is our
SingleBoard DSP System based on the DM6446 and Xilinx Spartan3E FPGAs.
The FALCON is heavily based on the DVEVM architecture; so you can take
an app developed on the DVEVM and run it with minor changes on the
FALCON.
I can send more details if someone is interested in specifics on the
FALCON.
Is there a process here for releasing patchsets for inclusion?
* Regarding U-Boot:
U-Boot patches have to go to U-Boot development list:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches
On U-Boot list they are more strict regarding patches than we are here
at DaVinci list, so you should follow some rules:
- Make sure your coding style is okay:
http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/CodingStyle
- U-Boot list has a limitation of 40kByte per Mail, so you have to
split your patch to reasonable parts. You can take Sergeys inital
DaVinci patch as an example:
http://sourceforge.net/search/?words=DaVinci&sort=posted_date&sortdir=de
sc&offset=70&group_id=65938&type_of_search=mlists&pmode=0
As subject I propose e.g.:
[PATCH 0/x] ARM: DaVinci: Support for FLE FALCON
[PATCH 1/x] ARM: ...
Normally, patch 0/x contains a description what the following patches
are about, without any patch in it. The real patches are in mails 1/x,
2/x etc. Don't forget your Signed-off-by:
- You need to use a mail tool to send the patches which can inline
patches (no attachment!) but doesn't wrap the lines. I was told that
git-send-mail does it the best way, but never tried myself. Maybe you
want to send the patches first to yourself and check the format before
sending them to the list.
* Regarding kernel:
I can't talk about MV kernel. From my point of view, this is quite
outdated (2.6.10?) and it would be a pain to port things to recent
kernel. So IMHO doing patches against this isn't a good idea.
If you like to support open source community and release patches
against recent open source git kernel:
Yes, we are really interested in patches! Unfortunately Kevin, who
maintains the git kernel, currently has only really limited time to do
so. But basically we are really interested in patches.
Regarding the patches themself, most of the rules applying for U-Boot
will work here as well. However, we are not so strict, as patch
frequency is lower here.
- Codingstyle: ./scripts/checkpatch.pl of Linux kernel shouldn't have
any complains any more
- Subject style should be
[PATCH 0/x] ARM: DaVinci: Support for FLE FALCON
[PATCH 1/x] ARM: ...
as well.
- We have no 40k limit here and attachments should at least be okay.
But split your patches in reasonable, easy to review parts. And if you
select attachments, send them so that mail tools will understand them
as text and not binary.
Regarding kernel and U-Boot all patches have to apply to recent code
without recjects, but this should be clear ;)
Be prepared that most probably you have to go through several
review-cyles and iterations before everybody is happy and patches are
considered for inclusion. Can be time consuming... ;)
Best regards
Dirk
_______________________________________________
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
