On 12/05/2012 08:27 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 10:06 -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote: >> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:48 +0000, Burton, Ross wrote: >>> On 21 November 2012 21:32, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@windriver.com> >>> wrote: >>>> atom-pc should probably be using the 3.4 kernel, but that's a >>>> question for Darren/Tom/Nitin (so I've added them to the cc), since >>>> there may be a reason (with respect to graphics) as to why it is on >>>> 3.0. >>> >>> Ping Darren/Tom/Nitin. >>> >>> atom-pc is certainly lagging behind by still being on 3.0, and I can't >>> see any reason why we'd want to stick with 3.0 for graphics. In fact >>> as the most common graphics driver used on atom-pc is a i965 we want a >>> modern kernel as that is where the development is. >>> >> >> I don't know of any technical reason for it to still be at 3.0. >> >> Until recently all of the 'core machines' were at 3.0 and probably the >> assumption was that whoever upgraded those in the past would also be >> upgrading atom-pc - has that changed?. >> >> So who does own the core machines and if that doesn't cover atom-pc, >> then who owns that? > > As I understood it, WR owns the non-IA core machines, you (as in the > Intel team) own the IA ones, namely atom-pc.
Agreed, it should be updated. Tom, Nitin, and I will discuss and select an owner. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel _______________________________________________ linux-yocto mailing list linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto