Le 17. 11. 14 23:46, Robert a écrit :
On 17/11/2014 14:45, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
If you take the risk to rely exclusively on a vendor BSP, take your
responsibility and don't blame others for your poor choice. Most today
SoC vendors understand that there must upload there patches to mainline
kernel and do it routinely. This means that while some vendors still
offer BSP (because there have clients asking for it), last mainline
kernel run as well just fine on there SoC.
Wow, how wonderful that the SoC you use has mainline support.
I actually work on a prototype using an Atmel ARM Cortex-A5 (SAMA5D35):
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/?id=refs%2Ftags%2Fv3.18-rc5&qt=grep&q=SAMA5
But mainline have support for a lot of chips already:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm?id=refs/tags/v3.18-rc5
Sometimes this require to use patches not already in mainline. This is
usually the case for some less used driver. I strongly prefer to start
from mainline and find patches to get the features I need than trying
work with a BSP. In addition I have to say that I design hardware
architecture to avoid using driver not well supported. Today sysfs,
spidev, i2cdev, and libusb give enough flexibility to code everything
related to my hardware in user space applications. I design hardware
running Linux since 1998 and I found that the today situation is
incredibly good and easy compared to what I used to see.
Regards,
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
