On 12/10/2012 03:53 PM, Thierry Bultel wrote:
> Le 10/12/2012 00:54, Gilles Chanteperdrix a écrit :
>> On 12/09/2012 09:06 PM, Thierry Bultel wrote:
>>
>>> Le 07/12/2012 19:34, Gilles Chanteperdrix a écrit :
>>>> On 12/07/2012 02:28 PM, Thierry Bultel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Hello Gilles,
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have "successfully" patched a 3.0.35 kernel from Freescale with
>>>>> adeos-ipipe-3.0.36-1.18.11
>>>>>
>>>>> I have -not- applied the adeos-ipipe-3.0.36-arm-1.18-11-pre.patch
>>>>> that showed too much "revert patch detected" errors.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The patch should apply cleanly, the question, if you get too many
>>>> rejections, it is because you do not apply it to the proper branch.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course it was not.
>>> I started with a kernel provided by the module manufacturer. I estimate
>>> that this kernel is "almost" a rel_imx_3.0.35_12.09.02, I mean, that
>>> I have not found a closer tag than this one.
>>>
>>> My first idea was to attempt to apply the patches to that kernel
>>> directly. I was not expecting it would have been simple, and it was
>>> actually not. But after a few hours I came to the initial result I said.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, I have understand that its purpose was mainly to upgrade to 3.0.36,
>>>>> but what is actually the role of the
>>>>> adeos-ipipe-3.0.36-arm-1.18-11-post.patch ? (I applied it).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have explained this in a previous mail.
>>>
>>> Ok, I will seek in the history. I would be nice if the explanation
>>> was in the README.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I had to deal with some rejections but at least the kernel is booting
>>>>> and my application running.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the target is very slow, and /proc/xenomai/irq shows that the
>>>>> [timer] irq only comes about every 1 second.
>>>>>
>>>>> The /proc/interrupts shows an IRQ every 10ms, which was expected
>>>>> since I have CONFIG_HZ=100
>>>>>
>>>>> I am pretty sure that I messed up something in the patch process,
>>>>> however I do not know where to start to look for.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apply the patches to the proper imx release, and everything should be fine.
>>>
>>>
>>> That is what I did, at last.
>>> To do so, I have extracted the BSP from the given 'almost'
>>> rel_imx_3.0.35_12.09.02 kernel,
>>> taken the rel_imx_3.0.15_12.03.00, applied the patches,
>>> and brought back the BSP to the patched kernel.
>>
>
> The issues I mentionned are not also present with CONFIG_IPIPE=no,
> so it is just that the 3.0.15 kernel does not have everything for my board.
>
>>
>> I would do what you want to do with git. Checkout the ipipe-3.0-imx6q
>> branch from the ipipe-gch.git, then merge it with the vendor branch you
>> want to use.
>>
>
> Sure it would work and would be fine with git.
> But unfortunalely I do not have access to the repository of the vendor,
> but only to a bz2 snapshot of their kernel.
>
> I wonder if the right method would be to use git to merge Ipipe to the
> 3.0.35_12_09.02, and then bring back the BSP that I have isolated as a patch
Yes, if the vendor BSP is based on 3.0.35_12_09.02, you should make a
diff with that, and try and merge it with the ipipe-3.0-imx6q branch.
--
Gilles.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.xenomai.org/mailman/listinfo/xenomai
