reorganzing the lava projects on launchpad

Hi there, Some of you know about this already as it was discussed a bit at LDS, but probably not very inclusively. We have a slightly strange arrangement of projects on Launchpad, with the main ones being "launch-control" and "lava". AIUI, Zygmunt really wanted to call "launch-control" "dashboar

Re: approaching a final kernel for 11.05

On Wed, 18 May 2011, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 05:58:22PM -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote: > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:31 PM, John Rigby wrote: > > > Thanks to the heroic efforts of rsalveti the packaged > > > linux-linaro-omap kernel now greatly improved omap4 displ

Re: approaching a final kernel for 11.05

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 05:58:22PM -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:31 PM, John Rigby wrote: > > Thanks to the heroic efforts of rsalveti the packaged > > linux-linaro-omap kernel now greatly improved omap4 display > > functionality.  There is a .deb in the linaro-maintain

[STATUS] Android Platform Team 2011-05-18

See: https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/Status/2011-05-18 Highlights: 1. Android Panda LEB GFX being debugged. 2. Android BPs getting defined and work-items drafted. 3. Finishing validation integration. 4. Need Android PoC's from all landing teams and WGs. -Zach _

Re: approaching a final kernel for 11.05

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:31 PM, John Rigby wrote: > Thanks to the heroic efforts of rsalveti the packaged > linux-linaro-omap kernel now greatly improved omap4 display > functionality.  There is a .deb in the linaro-maintainers kernel ppa. > If you have a panda board and have time to try it out y

[NOTES] Linaro Developer Platform Weekly Status Meeting 5/18

Enclosed you'll find a link to the agenda, notes and actions from the Linaro Developer Platforms Weekly Status meeting held on May 18th in #linaro-meeting on irc.freenode.net at 15:00 UTC. https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/DevPlatform/Meetings/2011-05-18 New Actions: * None Regards, Tom Developer

approaching a final kernel for 11.05

Thanks to the heroic efforts of rsalveti the packaged linux-linaro-omap kernel now greatly improved omap4 display functionality. There is a .deb in the linaro-maintainers kernel ppa. If you have a panda board and have time to try it out your feedback would be much appreciated: https://launchpad.n

Re: Bootchart analysis

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Riku Voipio wrote: > On 18 May 2011 16:53, Dave Martin wrote: >> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Tom Gall wrote: > >>> https://wiki.linaro.org/BootChart > >> Due to the poor I/O throughput, it looks a bit like we might be >> hitting the known SD card write beha

Re: Bootchart analysis

+++ Christian Robottom Reis [2011-05-18 11:32 -0300]: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 02:53:22PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > > Hi, > > Um, why are we writing to anything on boot up? Daemons writing their pids to /var/run, is one example. One advantage of plan to move /run to root and make it a tmpfs.

Re: Gerrit userstory for multi-branch development

2011/5/18 Patrik Ryd : > On 18 May 2011 13:07, Linus Walleij wrote: >> I think it basically boils down to the fact that a single >> Gerrit branch is seen as "the place to integrate", whereas >> in kernel terms, you should integrate a single topic >> (such as "i2c updates", "boardfiles", "regulator

Re: Bootchart analysis

> The long time of "mount" looks fishy. Are you sure you are booting > with a clean filesystem? > > Other than that we see that > > 1) we start too much (cron, gdm, ...) for our use case > 2) too many shells started to parse shell scripts > > As for finding files writes to on boot, using a "find /

Re: Bootchart analysis

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Riku Voipio wrote: > On 18 May 2011 16:53, Dave Martin wrote: >> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Tom Gall wrote: > >>> https://wiki.linaro.org/BootChart > >> Due to the poor I/O throughput, it looks a bit like we might be >> hitting the known SD card write behav

Re: Bootchart analysis

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 02:53:22PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Tom Gall wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > From UDS last week I was inspired to run bootchart on our Linaru >> > Ubuntu-desktop

Re: Usefulness of GCC's 64bit __sync_* ops on ARM

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Tue, 17 May 2011, Dave Martin wrote: > >> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Nicolas Pitre >> wrote: >> > On Fri, 6 May 2011, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> > >> >> On 6 May 2011 16:06, Ken Werner wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Currently the GCC

Re: Bootchart analysis

On 18 May 2011 16:53, Dave Martin wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Tom Gall wrote: >> https://wiki.linaro.org/BootChart > Due to the poor I/O throughput, it looks a bit like we might be > hitting the known SD card write behaviour issues; mounting with > noatime and/or journaling disabl

Re: Bootchart analysis

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 02:53:22PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Tom Gall wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > From UDS last week I was inspired to run bootchart on our Linaru > > Ubuntu-desktop LEB. > > > > I collected the data on my panda board using the daily snaps

Re: Bootchart analysis

Hi, On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Tom Gall wrote: > Hi All, > > From UDS last week I was inspired to run bootchart on our Linaru > Ubuntu-desktop LEB. > > I collected the data on my panda board using the daily snapshot from last > week. > > From a very quick examination of the output, it woul

Re: Gerrit userstory for multi-branch development

On 18 May 2011 13:07, Linus Walleij wrote: > 2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky : > > > You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working with > > multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work > > against single (master) branch (as far as I understood). > > It was mainly me

Re: Gerrit userstory for multi-branch development

2011/5/16 Paul Sokolovsky : > You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for working with > multiple topic branches, in particular, that it enforces work > against single (master) branch (as far as I understood). It was mainly me blathering about Gerrit in that session so don't go afte

Re: Better reviews for the same cost in gcc-linaro

On 18 May 2011 10:23, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > On 17/05/11 17:01, Martin Pool wrote: >> >> I wanted to share with you some numbers on our changes in bzr 2.4 (final >> in August), based on the much-appreciated feedback from Linaro.    The >> details are in >>

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] ARMV7: MMC SPL Boot support for SMDKV310 board

Dear Minkyu Kang, On 17 May 2011 13:56, Minkyu Kang wrote: > Dear Chander Kashyap, > > Sorry to late review. > > On 21 April 2011 16:02, Chander Kashyap wrote: >> Added MMC SPL boot support for SMDKV310. This framework design is >> based on nand_spl support. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chander Kashyap

Re: Gerrit userstory for multi-branch development

On 16 May 2011 17:52, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: > Hello Arnd, > > I'd like to follow up to the discussion which took place during > "Android Code Review" session at LDS > (https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/Specs/AndroidCodeReview). > > You expressed concern that Gerrit is not too flexible for

Re: Better reviews for the same cost in gcc-linaro

On 17/05/11 17:01, Martin Pool wrote: I wanted to share with you some numbers on our changes in bzr 2.4 (final in August), based on the much-appreciated feedback from Linaro.The details are in but the short story is that l

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/2] ARMV7: Add support for Samsung SMDKV310 Board

Dear Chander Kashyap, On 21 April 2011 16:02, Chander Kashyap wrote: > SMDKV310 board is based on Samsung S5PV310 SOC. This SOC is very much > similar to S5PC210. > > Signed-off-by: Chander Kashyap > Signed-off-by: Tushar Behera > --- > Changes for v2: >        - Coding Style Cleanup >        -

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/2] ARMV7: Add support for Samsung SMDKV310 Board

Dear Wolfgang Denk, On 18 May 2011 16:49, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Minkyu Kang, > > In message you wrote: >> >> > diff --git a/boards.cfg b/boards.cfg >> > index 554e06c..01edb79 100644 >> > --- a/boards.cfg >> > +++ b/boards.cfg > ... >> Please use space instead of tab. > > No! > > Indentati

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] S5P:SROM config code moved to s5p-common directory

Dear Wolfgang Denk, On 17 May 2011 17:46, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Chander Kashyap, > > In message <1302843918-1105-1-git-send-email-chander.kash...@linaro.org> you > wrote: >> SROM config code is made common for S5P series of boards. >> smdkc100.c now refers to s5p-common/sromc.c for SROM re

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/2] ARMV7: Add support for Samsung SMDKV310 Board

Dear Minkyu Kang, In message you wrote: > > Hm, but everyone is using the space on "boards.cfg". I will eventually run "unexpand -a" on the file again... Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenst

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/2] ARMV7: Add support for Samsung SMDKV310 Board

Dear Minkyu Kang, In message you wrote: > > > diff --git a/boards.cfg b/boards.cfg > > index 554e06c..01edb79 100644 > > --- a/boards.cfg > > +++ b/boards.cfg ... > Please use space instead of tab. No! Indentation / vertical alignment SHALL be done using TABs! Best regards, Wolfgang Denk --