Folks, in case you didn't notice: we have a 4.0-based ipipe for zynq in git (http://git.xenomai.org/ipipe.git/log/?h=vendors/xilinx/zynq/ipipe-4.0). You may move things to 4.1-LTS from there if you need long-term support.
Jan On 2016-04-25 22:09, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:01:40PM +0300, Ran Shalit wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 07:38:45PM +0300, Ran Shalit wrote: >>>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Lennart Sorensen >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 10:21:50AM +0300, Ran Shalit wrote: >>>>>> We intend to use ipipe with zynq (we already have 3.12.0 kernel used >>>>>> with zynq). >>>>>> Do you think the patch should be relevant for zynq ? >>>>>> I see that xilinx have their own patch , but it is for older kernel 2.6.3 >>>>>> http://www.wiki.xilinx.com/Xenomai+for+Zynq#Xenomai for Zynq-7000 AP >>>>>> SoC Linux--Patch > > Actually that is xenomai 2.6.3 with 3.8 kernel patches. 2.6.4 is the > latest xenomai 2, while current xenomai is now 3.x (which we have not > yet moved to but really should at some point). > > The fact it needs pre and post patches for zynq makes me suspect it > might involve a bit more work, but maybe I am wrong. I have never had > to deal with pre and post patches. > >>>>> You can give it a try. The zynq does have a Cortex-A9 as far as I recall, >>>>> so it ought to work. Doesn't mean there aren't other bits that need >>>>> fixing in the zynq specific code. But maybe there isn't. >>>>> >>>>> Just remember it was never an officially supported kernel version. >>>>> It worked for us, it was given a once over by a proper xenomai developer >>>>> who did not seem to think it was wrong, but if it doesn't work I wouldn't >>>>> expect the xenomai developers to be excited to help fix it. >>>>> >>>>>> I also see that in git there is ipipe for 3.12.0 >>>>>> http://git.xenomai.org/ipipe-gch.git/log/?h=raw/for-ipipe-3.12.0 >>>>>> But again I am unsure if it is relevant for zynq too. >>>>> >>>>> Well that was a work in progress I believe and never officially released >>>>> as far as I recall. I started from that one, but the one I posted is >>>>> actually based on the 3.14 patch and backported as far as I recall. >>>>> It has been a while since we moved to 3.14. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Len Sorensen >>>> >>>> Hi Len, >>>> >>>> We've first tried to apply the patch for 3.12.0 but there were too many >>>> errors, >>>> so we eventually used >>>> http://git.xenomai.org/ipipe-gch.git/log/?h=raw/for-ipipe-3.12.0 >>>> latest commit. >>>> I hope the ipipe should work without any issues wuth this tree. >>>> Is there a way to check if ipipe is OK with our version based on this >>>> commit ? >>> >>> Bad idea, this branch corresponds to some intermediate state. I >>> removed it. >>> >>> -- >>> Gilles. >> >> Hi Gilles, >> >> Is there any better way to apply ipipe on 3.12.0 ? > > Well as I said, I backported the 3.14 patch to 3.12 when we used 3.12, > which wasn't too hard. That's what my patch for 3.12 was. > > Unfortunately 3.12 was never a supported kernel for xenomai. > -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux _______________________________________________ Xenomai mailing list [email protected] https://xenomai.org/mailman/listinfo/xenomai
