On 22/05/12 01:58, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:33:47AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
like Andy, I am a bit concerned that we merge the android stuff
into the linaro-core and that we get android candies in 'vanilla'
kernel. can't we (shouldn't we) have -android on top of -core and
pull -android only into 'android' kernel? it's true that for most
things, -android is not impacting a 'vanilla' kernel, but clearly
>from the outside (community *and* customers) a kernel 'tainted'
with Android is not a 'vanilla' kernel anymore...
So this re-opens the discussion we've been having since at least
last Oct in moving to a consolidated kernel.
Since Android upstreaming is an very active goal of Linaro, I think
there's strong technical value in putting the Android patches in
along with all the other Linaro trees, as it allows us to work out
any sort of incompatibilities or issues, so we can resolve them
prior to being pushed upstream.
I'm quite +1 on what John is saying. There was a time when there was
great uncertainty about the future of the Android patches, but since
Linus' comment last year it's become dead certain that the functionality
/will/ be merged upstream. We can pave the way by getting any
integration issues sorted out early -- similarly to what we do for
practically everything else in linux-linaro.
Hm I just said we should audit it for being dependent on CONFIG_ANDROID.
If we KNOW that deconfiguration of CONFIG_ANDROID is equivalent to not
having Androidization patched in, people will stop wanting to get rid of
the patches. But since Google's interest is in the case it is
configured, I doubt they took care about having it disabled well.
For other configurable features in the mainline kernel, part of the deal
of getting in there is that they can be turned off nicely. There's even
a wholesale CONFIG_PM. But the remaining (200 or so last time I looked)
Androidization patches haven't been through that kind of scrutiny by
anyone. Again last time I looked they fiddled with a fair amount of
kernel guts, sometimes with additional config coverage but not always.
Initially we added without discrimination that 7 year old patch that
turns dmesg into junk to llct because it came in with Google's
Androidization series. It suggests we're just shovelling them on
without any plan at the moment.
If we're claiming we are converging these patches to upstream, "working
out integration issues" then we should be auditing them for being
properly dependent on CONFIG_ANDROID before adding them to the same
basis used for vanilla consumers.
-Andy
--
Andy Green | TI Landing Team Leader
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs | Follow Linaro
http://facebook.com/pages/Linaro/155974581091106 -
http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://linaro.org/linaro-blog
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
