On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 13:18 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:34:36AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > (adding debian-arm/-kernel) > > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 11:58 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:30:17AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2014-02-07 at 18:34 +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > > > > > On 02/07/2014 12:42 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > > > Now that all the device tree support is in mach-mvebu, remove it > > > > > > from > > > > > > mach-kirkwood. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regenerate kirkwood_defconfig, removing all DT support, and a couple > > > > > > > > s/DT/board-file/? > > > > > > We keep any system using -setup.c files, and remove the ability to > > > boot systems with a DT description. Thus mach-kirkwood becomes legacy, > > > and you should now be trying to only use mach-mvebu, compiled for v5 > > > systems and a second compile for v7 systems. > > > > Just to check I've got it: The majority of the systems previously > > supported by mach-kirkwood (either board file or DTB based) are now > > supported by mach-mvebu. > > We plan to move all kirkwood systems which are DT to mach-mvebu. Any > systems which are not DT will get left in mach-kirkwood. > > What would be interesting to know is, if any of the systems left > behind are supported by debian. So LaCie 2Big and 5Big, HP t5325 thin > client and Marvell OpenRD machines? If you don't support any of these, > you can drop mach-kirkwood. > > > Is it possible to have both ARCH_KIRKWOOD and ARCH_MVEBU in the same > > v5 .config? > > Armada XP, 370, and the new SoCs going in this cycle all use ARM v7 > CPUs. Dove also uses an ARM v7 cpu and we intent to move it from > mach-dove into mach-mvebu. > > Now ARM v7 cpu and ARM v5 CPUs are mutually incompatible. You cannot > combine them into one kernel. Do you currently build mach-mvebu as > part of a multi v7 kernel. That is, you have one kernel which boots on > all v7 machines?
Debian has a single v7 flavour, armmp which uses the multi platform stuff. (actually there is a second armmp-lpae, but lets ignore that) I'm only really concerned about the v5 stuff here. Debian has multiple v5 flavours: ixp4xx, kirkwood, mv78xx0, orion5x and versatile. > What this patchset does is also make mach-mvebu part of the multi v5 > kernel. So you just need one kernel for all ARM v5 machines which are > part of multi v5. The long term goal is that you need just two 32 ARM > kernels, multi v5 and multi v7. However orion5x and mv76xx0 are not > yet part of theses, so we are not there yet. So in answer to my question, on v5 ARCH_KIRKWOOD and ARCH_MVEBU *cannot* coexist in the same binary? > > IOW that all of the platforms currently supported by the > > Debian kirkwood flavour remain supportable in the same binary after this > > change. It looks like it should be to me, but I'm not 100% sure. > > If you don't support LaCie 2Big and 5Big, HP t5325 thin client and > Marvell OpenRD then yes, you have one binary. That binary could > potentially support over v5 machines, but i have no idea what ARM > machines Debian actually supports. Is there a list somewhere? http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=d-i/flash-kernel.git;a=blob;f=db/all.db;h=fab340782c783c4f8a172f0424a791037dee90cf;hb=HEAD is a reasonable approximation for what is supported, at least in a well integrated way. I can see all of the LaCie systems, t5325 and openrd stuff which you mention in that list. http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/kernel/dists/trunk/linux/debian/config/armel/config.kirkwood?revision=20912&view=markup is the kirkwood specific kernel config s/trunk/wheezy/ if you want to see the current stable version. Other config.* for other flavours. I'm only concerned with the impact of these changes on the kirkwood flavour right now, I don't want to confuse the matter by considering the possibility of consolidating flavours. Ian. > > > Is there a tree I can pull to see what is going into v3.15 in this > > area? > > At the moment there is not a tree with all the different parts. I > have a tree with these specific patches. There are other trees which > contain new DT descriptions for new devices, like Bubba B3, and > systems which have been converted to DT, like the QNAP T4xx. > > > > My aim is 3.15. Most patches have been Acked now, so i think we are on > > > track for that. > > > > If kirkwood and mvebu are mutually exclusive on v5 then this sounds like > > it might end up being more complicated than just setting Append-DTB-From > > in the flash-kernel db. In that case if we could hold off on pulling the > > existing kirkwood support until there is a transition plan here I'd be > > very grateful. > > Lets make sure we are all on the same page with v5, v7, kirkwood, > mvebu, multi, and what kernels Debian currently builds and how > flash-kernel works etc. We can then discuss transition plans. > > Andrew > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1392900664.23342.60.ca...@kazak.uk.xensource.com
