On Sun, 2013-09-15 at 16:42 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > As discussed previously, I think PCI should be enabled for the > armhf/armmp flavour as the Marvell Armada SoCs have PCIe interfaces. It > might be worthwhile to restrict which PCI drivers are built, if this > slows the build down a lot.
I've started preparing patches for this against trunk. As well as turning on CONFIG_PCI I'm also looking at enabling some additional NIC and SCSI cards and adding the standard nic-modules and scsi-modules to the udebs. My armhf system is pretty fast so I can't make a good judgement on slowing the build down (however that should be mitigated by the removal of other flavours?) > Ian also proposed to add an armhf/armmp-lpae flavour. I think it's time > to do that, but I would also like to see the 3 platform-specific armhf > flavours removed. Which of the platforms are sufficiently well > supported by armhf/armmp that we can do that? I've got patches to remove mx5 and vexpress in my queue, I don't know how/why I skipped omap, but I'll add it in. I cannot answer the question of how well they are actually supported (so I'd be reluctant to push them). I do have some i.MX53 (loco) boards at the office but I'm away at the minute (they are technically "production" but are mostly obsolete and I could nick one or two for testing). > The new imx-drm driver (CONFIG_DRM_IMX) should probably be enabled in > armhf/armmp and armhf/mx5. That reminds me, kernel-wedge is currently complaining about missing sdhci-esdhc-imx from the mx5 flavour. I think this is fallout from disabling MMC_SDHCI_PLTFM in 3.11-1~exp1. > After some cleanup of the top-level configuration, the armel/iop32x and > armel/ixp4xx flavours can again be built. However these may still need > specific attention in the future. > > Ben. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1379260396.11304.35.ca...@hastur.hellion.org.uk