On 03/28/2012 05:24 AM, Tushar Behera wrote:
On 03/27/2012 12:50 AM, John Stultz wrote:
So after talking about it at the last Linaro Connect, I've finally
gotten around to making a first pass at providing config fragments for
the linaro kernel. I'd like to propose merging this for 12.04, and
doing so early so we can make sure that all the desired config options
are present in the fragments and to allow the vairous linaro build
systems to begin migrating their config generation over.
The current tree is here:
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/jstultz/android.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linaro-configs-3.3
The most relevant commit being:
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/jstultz/android.git;a=commitdiff;h=da8f6d20e1a768cb486005c5ec62582b6f92990d
This includes config fragments for a linaro-base, an android-ization
fragment, and board configs for panda, origen and imx53.
I suspect we'll need an ubuntu specific fragment as well as all the
other board fragments.
There is likely to be quite a bit of churn as we decide what sort of
configs are really common and which are board specific. But that's ok.
Configs are generated from the config fragments, as follows:
./scripts/kconfig/merge_config.sh ./configs/linaro-base.conf
./configs/android.conf ./configs/panda.conf
You may see warnings, which are not fatal, but should be reported so
they can be properly cleaned up.
I'm asking for Build folks to take a look at the above and consider how
they might merge in fragment assembly into their system replacing their
current config generation.
I'd ask Landing teams to take a look at this, and report any missing
config options or fragment chunks they'd like to see.
I have updated origen.conf and linaro-base.conf for testing Samsung LT
kernel. The results are updated in [1].
I'll take a look at the changes and try to merge them into my tree.
I have not validated the changes in android.conf, but by merging
linaro-base.conf and origen.conf, I was able to boot my kernel the way I
would have expected when using exynos4_defconfig.
One thing I notice is that I find far too many debug messages with this
new config.
You mean the debug output from the merge_config.sh script is a bit
noisy? Yea. Likely we'll have some extra noise as we settle out what
options needs to be generic vs board specific. But it should decrease
over time.
Going forward, would it be better to have linaro-base.conf, android.conf
and ubuntu.conf managed centrally and each LT managing their board
specific configuration file. That way, we can include the changes in our
board specific configurations in respective topic branches.
So yea, I'd like to delegate/give away as much management of the configs
as possible. :)
That said, I do think that we'll need someone looking at the entire
cross-board fragment picture (since if everyone needs an option, it
really isn't board specific). So it might be a good idea to have basic
board config fragments that work with upstream. Then any board-specific
feature branches can add their config needs in as a patch on top.
Does that sound reasonable?
thanks
-john
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
