Hi Andy,
On 04/25/2012 06:22 AM, Andy Green wrote:
On 04/25/2012 03:43 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
Hi Andrey -
I've just created linux-linaro-core-tracking branch in
git://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-tracking.git.
It is based on mainline tip, and has all the Platform and Working Groups
topics which would appear in the next linux-linaro kernel release. No
topics from the Landing Teams there (this is what "core" implies). This
Nice job, thanks for the new branch which definitely solves the
"chicken-and-egg".
In fact it's going to be a great tracking "fake future upstream" staging
point for all the good stuff being worked on that is not ready for
upstream yet. It'll help the LT trees look more consistently like
future upstreams where the vendor content is already in too, and let
people use technologies like UMM easily long before they appear
upstream. In that way hopefully we will provide
I've changed basis to it (there's not much choice but to take that
approach since it's done with merges, but lack of any nexty content
means it was painless), and it has updated thermal, CMA (#21 -> #24) and
other little bits like Panda dt I could remove from our tree and use
these common versions for.
Please don't remove your dt bits! Instead let me know when I can drop
the conflicting (== redundant) commits from my tracking-unsorted branch.
In fact, you've made a good point, and I'll probably just stop merging
the tracking-unsorted into linux-linaro-core-tracking. This unsorted
stuff is mostly "orphaned" commits from very old linaro kernel releases
and the "last minute before the release" fixes. In a perfect world this
unsorted topic just shouldn't exist.
Otherwise it made very few conflicts
compared to yesterday's Linus HEAD we were already on and the tree is as
workable as it was.
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=landing-teams/working/ti/kernel.git;a=summary
Great!
Maybe it's something on my side but I noticed I have android logging
coming on my vanilla defconfig now. I can force it off in my defconfig,
but I am wondering if that's intentional?
No, it wasn't. In the Android patchset all their new config options are
"y" by default, regardless of CONFIG_ANDROID even. We (well, John
Stultz) have started changing these defaults to "n", and to enabling
them in configs/android.conf (the WAKELOCK ones,
ANDROID_PARANOID_NETWORK, and NET_ACTIVITY_STATS).
We're still undergoing uplevel on tilt-tracking and didn't get back to
tilt-3.3 functionality yet (OMAP4 boot is busted, although hopefully we
have a fix for that today), so I put off this common config thing.
However now I see it included, aren't most of the patches about board
support redundant? If LTs base on this, they will add in their own
golden initial defconfig for their board(s) at that point; when they're
combined they'll all be in the combined tree. It seems like I shouldn't
be seeing a defconfig about Panda coming in with this base tree,
yes (this comes from the "unsorted" topic wich I am going to drop from
this tree) ...
but create it (perhaps after mixing in config fragments that did come in
with the base tree) in my tree.
...and yes
Although as I say our tracking is still missing some topics compared to
tilt-3.3 as we are uplevelling, with this change of basis and
elimination of CMA#21 delta we had until now, actually tilt-tracking can
be considered for trial merge in unified tree I think. It's not very
meaningful in terms of usefulness of our tree right now but it certainly
should be interesting in terms of what makes trouble, if anything.
Very good. I was thinking about creating (reusing actually)
linux-linaro-tracking branch to be the linux-linaro-core-tracking plus
the LT's topics. But I still have quite a long TODO list, and
linux-linaro-core-tracking and linux-linaro branches are higher
priorities for me. So no commitments WRT linux-linaro-tracking at the
moment :)
Thanks,
Andrey
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
