On 03/28/2012 10:17 PM, John Stultz wrote: > 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. > I was talking about the console log messages upon booting on a target board.
>> 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? Sounds good. Any config that enables a feature on a topic branch specific to a board should go in a patch in the topic branch itself. -- Tushar Behera _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
