is is using default mount options for file system but with noatime.
These timings also bear out preliminary results from my simulation code.
Which I'm glad of :-)
Note, I've only been looking at write performance.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev ma
enabled flash mode. I don't know what is different in flash
> > mode and I don't know if when I let Ubuntu auto-mount a flash card for
> > testing on my Laptop if it enabled it. The only mount option I can
> > find that sounds right is "ssd", which isn't on w
On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 11:48 +0100, James Tunnicliffe wrote:
> This is odd. When I performed tests btrfs and ext4 were both about the
> same speed for copying a mixture of large and small files to. I was
> testing them using my laptop card reader though. Tixy: Do you get
> similar b
On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 11:48 +0100, James Tunnicliffe wrote:
> On 17 August 2011 08:55, Tixy wrote:
> > For untaring kernel source on one of my good performance
> > SD cards on a Beagleboard-xM takes:
> >
> > m s
> > ext4 3:30
> > ext3 8
On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 14:28 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 18 August 2011, Tixy wrote:
> > I couldn't test logfs because, whilst mkfs worked, the mount command (or
> > the kernel?) doesn't seem to support it.
>
> Probably the module was not enabled in th
On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 13:18 +0100, Tixy wrote:
> I also tested the different btrfs mount options (ssd, nossd and
> ssd_spread). They don't show much difference with the untar case.
To follow on from this... When benchmarking debboottrap, I found the
'ssd' option is th
ion/single-stepping of the different CPU
instructions?
Thanks for any feedback
--
Tixy
[1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gdb.patches/54862
[2]
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/72199/focus=73489
___
linaro-dev mailing lis
Hi Grant
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 03:25 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> For each board, I need an engineer to do the following:
>
> 1) Enable CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT and CONFIG_SYS_BOOTMAPSZ against the Linaro
> u-boot tree.
Which tree should I use, u-boot-linaro-stable or u-boot-linaro-next
next missing bits when it dawned on
me I must be doing something wrong. Surely there is a branch somewhere
which already has all the essential changes?
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Fri, 2011-03-25 at 12:47 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Tixy wrote:
[...]
> >
> > "Allow the device tree binary to be appended to zImage"
> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg119379.html
>
> You don't need
currently has an oops when it cannot
> mount the initramfs. Still investigating...
Thanks for posting to the mailing lists. I was just about to start
tackling the off-by-one ramdisk sizes when I thought I'd check the list
to see if anyone had been there before me :-)
--
Tixy
_
ecking for machine type.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
ecking for machine type.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
[PATCH] ARM: device-tree: Add basic device tree support for Beagleboad
Note, no corresponding U-Boot changes to U-Boot are required as the
Linaro version already has these.
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/
From: Jon Medhurst
Signed-off-by: Jon Medhurst
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle.dts | 19 +++
arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3beagle.c |6 ++
2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle.dts
diff --git a/ar
gt; too strongly about the name.
I would suggest we don't use a 'u' prefix for the name of the device
tree file as it doesn't have a U-Boot header, though its not really that
important.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing
On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 10:16 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> one reason why my understanding of the actual problem here was a bit
> patchy.
:-)
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/li
t has and what hasn't been tested.
My testing...
Booted on headless Beagleboard xM
- SD Card OK
- Network OK
- USB flash drive mounts OK
- Unfixed bug #712175 still manifests [1]
- Blocked kworker thread issue manifests [2]
--
Tixy
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux-linaro/+bug/712175
[
l appears to hang
after "Starting kernel...". I haven't investigated any further.
The .config I'm using is that described on the wiki at
https://wiki.linaro.org/Resources/HowTo/KernelDeploy#From_Linaro_sources
--
Tixy
___
linaro-d
On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 17:44 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Tixy wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 01:12 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >> Time to leave 2.6.38 behind and move on! We now have a 2.6.39 based
> >> Linaro kernel which can be vi
THUMB2_KERNEL=y
+# CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL is not set
-CONFIG_THUMB2_AVOID_R_ARM_THM_JUMP11=y
-CONFIG_ARM_ASM_UNIFIED=y
+CONFIG_OABI_COMPAT=y
+# CONFIG_KPROBES is not set
+CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES=y
+CONFIG_HAVE_KRETPROBES=y
+CONFIG_HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER=y
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
ro-2.6.39. Am I
> going nuts :?)
No, were using two different methods to produce configs. The one I use
produces a Thumb2 kernel, the one you use doesn't.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Tue, 2011-12-20 at 15:44 +0800, Andy Green wrote:
> but your suggestion is more elegant. I'm unsure of the ramifications of
> the 2G / 2G scheme so I'll give it a try later.
Android requires a 3G/1G split. (That may, or may not be rele
use that memory arrangement.
Can any Android experts confirm this?
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
A15 CPUs}
x {real hardware, fast models} and there are other combinations likely
in the future.)
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
ntu because hardware
pack and media create tools don't yet support this.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
osted?
Device trees for real hardware A5, A9 and A15 are in the same patches
which submit device tree support. The above repo additionall has a
device tree for RTSM.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 06:42 +, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 08:23 +1300, Michael Hope wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:50 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > DT support for vexp A9 is going into 3.4 I believe. Pawel has been
> > > working on it an
Have all the Gmail mail forwarded to your own server then use mail and
web services of your choice? That's what I do ;-)
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
inks to any docs on config fragments? I
started trying to create a fragment for vexpress which just contained:
CONFIG_ARCH_VEXPRESS=y
CONFIG_ARCH_VEXPRESS_CA9X4=y
but merge_config.sh said "Value requested for CONFIG_ARCH_VEXPRESS not
in final .config".
--
Tixy
# CONFIG_LOCALVE
On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 10:37 -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
> You can find our current test cases at
> https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/QA/TestCases/Ubuntu, and the 12.03 RC
> builds (for all boards and image flavors) at
> http://snapshots.linaro.org/oneiric/, with build id 20120327-1 for
> hwpacks
On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 14:58 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 10:37 -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
>
> > You can find our current test cases at
> > https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/QA/TestCases/Ubuntu, and the 12.03 RC
> > builds (for all boar
On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 09:36 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 06:40 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > Finally, where can I find links to any docs on config fragments? I
> > started trying to create a fragment for vexpress which just contained:
> >
>
On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 09:36 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 06:40 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 12:20 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >> I suspect we'll need an ubuntu specific fragment as well as all the
> >> other board fragments.
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 11:00 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/29/2012 02:22 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > John, I've attached a config fragment for Versatile Express.
> Great! I've merged that in! There's a few warnings though:
>
> Value requested for CON
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 09:33 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/30/2012 01:19 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > To do that the vexpress config fragment will need to be a topic branch
> > on the ARM Landing Teams git, and every topic which changes a config
> > needs to be stack
there is some magic to have conditional config options in
a fragment?)
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Sun, 2012-04-01 at 20:59 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On 03/31/2012 01:17 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 10:15 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >>
> >> In that case, just go ahead and push the full config to the config tree.
> >> If
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 17:45 +0800, Andy Green wrote:
> On 04/02/2012 05:31 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> > On Sun, 2012-04-01 at 20:59 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >> We could have a separate topic branch for the linaro-base and ubuntu and
> >> fragments (not board specific)
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 11:31 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 17:45 +0800, Andy Green wrote:
> > On 04/02/2012 05:31 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> [snipped my suggestion about organising lots of config fragment]
>
> > I don'
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 12:40 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> I guess I think the current split with board/base/{linaro|android} is
> about right. At least if the common bits have a permanent home in a git
> repo, then we have a single place to apply system wide changes and the
>
ly a single fully featured defconfig file and have
that used to produce builds, rather than having one built up from OMAP
bits supplied by you and other android/ubuntu/linaro bits obtained from
another source?
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 08:37 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/31/2012 02:17 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > We almost certainly need board specific android and ubuntu fragments as
> > well, so I'll add vexpress-android.conf and vexpress-ubuntu.conf as
> > well. (Unl
tion, for those teams without stacked
topics. And that the inputs to the tool (config fragments) be managed
and stored in a way that was intuitively used, e.g.
get linaro-bits android-bits board-bits
where it doesn't need to reference something outside of the git tree to
know what are in
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 11:18 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 04/02/2012 10:29 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 08:37 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >> On 03/31/2012 02:17 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> >>> We almost certainly need board specific a
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 12:30 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> The difficulty is that as Tixy earlier pointed out, are that the LT
> kernel trees are mainline based, and thus aren't based off of something
> that would contain the base/distro/board config fragments.
>
> One approach
On Tue, 2012-04-03 at 09:13 +0800, Andy Green wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 02:58 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> > On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 11:18 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >> On 04/02/2012 10:29 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 2012-04-02 at
and that they didn't edit them.
I think it makes sense if this 'upstream' doesn't include board files
though, they should come from LT trees.
We also need a better upstream than John's personal Android tree :-)
--
Tixy
___
ard files" means mach-xyz/board*.c for me I am guessing you
> mean board-specific defconfigs ^^
Indeed I did.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 10:05 +0530, Tushar Behera wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 03:59 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > I think it makes sense if this 'upstream' doesn't include board files
> > though, they should come from LT trees.
> >
> As for the board specif
ree). Will use your
> linaro-android-3.4 branch for 12.04. Thanks a lot for your efforts!
Does this mean the 12.04 release is going to be 3.4 based? If so, let us
know when you don't need 3.3 topic branches any more so we can move them
over to 3.4. (E.g. one of
en and I don't think a fix went into rc2,
so I may need to add a new 'fixes' topic. Would it be good to have
something like that anyway, even if its a topic branch which is empty a
lot of the time?
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
4544906f2c
Can you add this to linaro-android-3.4 and any other fixes you did that might
be missing?
Cheers
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
resulting kernel successfully booted an Oneiric desktop image I had
from a couple of weeks ago.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 08:59 -0500, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> On 17 April 2012 17:16, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
[...]
> > * tracking-linaro-android-3.4: I've tried it with a smaller subset of the
>
> Tixy, will your tracking vexpress Android build use a older kernel
> versi
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 09:55 -0500, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> On 18 April 2012 09:24, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 08:59 -0500, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> >> On 17 April 2012 17:16, Andrey Konovalov
> >> wrote:
> > [...]
> >> > * trac
but still, we could do better
and earlier testing of our code and board if a Linaro flavouring topic
was available.)
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
ndroid build [1]
--
Tixy
[1]
https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/vexpress-ics-gcc46-armlt-tracking-open/#build=3
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 10:22 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 00:22 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I updated (overwrote) the current linux-linaro tree
> > (git://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-tracking.git , linux-lin
On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 11:17 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 10:22 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 00:22 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > I updated (overwrote) the current linux-lin
On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 10:22 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 00:22 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I updated (overwrote) the current linux-linaro tree
> > (git://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-tracking.git , linux-lin
from the LT's own tree, then that kernel will still contain
Gator, (assuming the LT still pull core into there release).
The Gator code itself is a separate driver, so won't cause more than
trivial merge problems for people pulling the core branch.
--
Tixy
___
now [1] which use the kernel from the linux-linaro branch. I already
have this set to build daily and stopped the daily build of the 'stable'
build listed on the frontpage of android-build.linaro.org. Can someone
update that page?
--
Tixy
whatever is tip, then leave it unchanged til Thursday when you'll redo
it against rc7?
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 00:46 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >> Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one week
> >> it w
.
So in practice we're going to have a random mix of kernel version in a
release, and it's not worth getting hung up on Torvalds -rc version.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 02:27 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
> >> the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit, we
> >> certainly sho
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 11:38 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Forgot to Cc the list..
>
> 11.05.2012 11:37, Andrey Konovalov написал:
> > 11.05.2012 02:09, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) написал:
> >> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >>> Now
e kernel folks to take their patch emails to another list.
I agree, though I solved this problem personally by filtering mails from
the linaro-dev list to drop any that are To: or Cc:
linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
(I'm subscribed to that anywa
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 11:44 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 02:27 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy)
> >> wrote:
> >>
rm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-eabi- drivers/foo/bar.ko
Though, once you've done a failed make once, and corrected the source
code, I would have thought then next make would take next to no time for
the objects it had already built and so wouldn't be worth doing these
ow.)
If anyone has any questions or if anything is unclear, please do
hesitate to contact me.
For those people who have applied Mali driver patches to support
profiling by Gator: you don't need to modify those Mali patches, just
take the new version of Gator, this will still work OK.
Cheers
spread so thin.
Fortunately (?), the two teams have the drivers under different paths
with different module and Kconfig option naming, so they could coexist
in the same tree.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.lina
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 09:19 +0100, Sangwook Lee wrote:
> Is there any plan to push ARM driver into the mainline ?
I'm not aware of any plans.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/
focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one week
> it will use the mainline tip as the base.
What happened to this?
linux-linaro hasn't changed for 4 weeks now, so our vexpress 'tracking'
builds of Android and Ubuntu are in fact the
LT tree as a one-off.
OK, so you're saying linux-linaro is dead/on-hold and I should go back
to maintaining my own branches for releasing Ubuntu and Android VExpress
kernels? If that's true, I wish people would actually tell me these
things.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 18:59 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Have pushed to the linux-linaro some time ago
Thanks Andrey.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
attached a couple of patches for the config fragments (3.5
removed the PERF_COUNTERS config).
--
Tixy
>From f783410df7369354105759c25425108c23c081d0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jon Medhurst
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 14:24:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] configs: Make CONFIG_MODULES part o
On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 12:45 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> Tixy: My attention on this issue has been somewhat limited. You've been
> by far the most involved in helping deploy config fragments (though, I
> don't want to be punishing good behavior by suggesting this, so fee
On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 12:45 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 06/06/2012 07:09 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > Are we going to start using the config fragments we created a while ago?
> > (Or did we not reach consensus on that?)
> I wouldn't say there was a strong consensus.
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 08:15 -0600, John Rigby wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > Have a branch called config-core-tracking which will contain
> >
> > linaro-base.conf
> > ubuntu.conf
> > android.conf
> I think I missed s
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 08:15 -0600, John Rigby wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > Now, if the Ubuntu kernel packaging scripts could gain an option to
> > generate a config from these fragments... :-)
> >
> That will happen soon.
I shou
n the same
environment as Linaro's final releases
I intend to maintain git://git.linaro.org/kernel/configs.git and will
keep separate non 'tracking' branches for older kernel versions (I
currently have branches for 3.4).
--
Tixy
[1]
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=landing-teams/work
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 14:02 -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:14:05PM +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > I have created an git repo for the kernel config fragments we produced a
> > while ago, this is at git://git.linaro.org/kernel/configs.git
&g
e
enabled for Android to get certain usecases working for which it makes
more sense to keep in the Android config fragment.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Adding in Linaro Dev list for more visibility...
On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 14:08 -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > Hi Ricardo
> >
> > I notice the new ubuntu.conf seems to contain everything including the
> >
te description of what it did. Is it tool late to also do this in
the MP branch?
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 17:00 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11 July 2012 14:32, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 10:57 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> There's going to be an 'interesting' merge with our TC2
>
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 17:25 +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 05:17:44PM +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 17:00 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 11 July 2012 14:32, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > > On Wed
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 17:25 +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 05:17:44PM +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 17:00 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 11 July 2012 14:32, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > > On Wed
then they need to manually re-pull our topic branch [1].
For Android builds which don't use an in-tree version of Gator, I have
pushed the patch to the external git branch these Android builds use
[2], so they will automatically pick up the fix.
--
Tixy
[0]
http://git.linaro.org/g
We can't rely on Kconfig options to set the fast and slow CPU lists for
HMP scheduling if we want a single kernel binary to support multiple
devices with different CPU topology. E.g. ARM's TC2, Fast Models, or
even non big.LITTLE devices.
This patch adds the function arch_get_fast_and_slow_cpus()
Oops, I forgot to CC Viresh and Vincent on this, so resending...
---
We can't rely on Kconfig options to set the fast and slow CPU lists for
HMP scheduling if we want a single kernel binary to support multiple
devices with different CPU topology. E.g. ARM's TC2, Fast Models, or
even non big.LITTLE
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:47 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
>
> V4 contains following updates:
>
>
> - wq-hotplug patches from Tejun
> - slow-fast CPU DT support from Tixy
Thanks Viresh. :-)
I'm tidying up my TC2 power management branches, then I&#x
t-tc2.
Note, this includes 4 cpuidle patches from Colin Cross which are also in
the bit-LITTLE-MP, will this be a problem?
--
Tixy
[1] git://git.linaro.org/landing-teams/working/arm/kernel.git
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http:
l still work OK.
Cheers
--
Tixy
[1] Gator is the ARM target device components for ARM's Streamline
Performance Analyzer which is part of their Developer Studio (DS-5).
http://www.arm.com/products/tools/software-tools/ds-5/streamline.php
[2]
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=kernel/linux-l
- arm-asymmetric-support-v3 - Only one patch not mailined others
> are dropped
> 2. Rebased over v3.6-rc1
> 3. Extra patch from Morten/Tixy
>
Thanks
> NOTE: Compile tested only
I did a test merge of this new MP branch with our vexpress topics and
linaro-android-3.6-jstultz-rebase, and
fast-models when used with the boot-wrapper at [2], this includes
having a working display. However, on the big.LITLE models the A7 cores
don't start, giving "Failed to boot -38".
--
Tixy
[1]
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=landing-teams/working/arm/kernel.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads
On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:55 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 05:47:19PM +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > However, on the big.LITLE models the A7 cores
> > don't start, giving "Failed to boot -38".
>
> Does that bootwrapper do anythi
On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:55 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 05:47:19PM +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > Hi Andrey
> >
> > Can you include a new topic to linux-linaro which contains device-tree
> > files for ARM's fast models? This bran
1 - 100 of 255 matches
Mail list logo
