Adding in Linaro Dev list for more visibility... On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 14:08 -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote: > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) <t...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi Ricardo > > > > I notice the new ubuntu.conf seems to contain everything including the > > kitchen sink. It has things which (as people found out at release time) > > breaks networking and MMC on vexpress (CONFIG_REGULATORS) and it > > contains drivers and other support for loads of hardware which isn't > > present on any Linaro supported device; and if it was, should go in the > > board specific config fragments, not the Ubuntu one. > > This config is basically provided by the official ubuntu kernel > packages. We just removed a few specific devices, and some which would > not make much sense, but other then that it's basically the same one > you can find at your desktop. > > It's useful to enable all these additional configs for a bunch of > reasons, like sharing with Ubuntu, enabling additional usb-based > devices and such. We have tons of bugs requesting us to add stuff to > the kernel config, and having this config fragment solves them all. > > If there's any hardware specific thing that could be disabled, we > could just move to the board config. Regarding CONFIG_REGULATORS, I > just decided to disable it at the vexpress.conf, as it only breaks > stuff at vexpress (and makes sense to track it there).
Well, the other boards which need regulators already enable it, so there's not really any need for Ubuntu to have this config. This particular issue isn't worth worrying about - we'll be adding regulators to vexpress to enable the single kernel image initiative - but it does seem to show up a general issue of the blurring of the purpose of config fragments; if Ubuntu enables a bunch of hardware support, what is the roll of the board config fragments? I noticed that the Ubuntu config was patched to remove ATH6KL with the commit title "should be platform dependent". What was the reasoning for singling that driver out? > > I think that for vexpress at least, you have used ubuntu-minimal.conf > > for the 12.06 release and the current CI jobs. What is the plan going > > forward? To me, it would seem to make more sense to start with the > > minimal config and add things as they are found to be missing. > > We tried in the past, but that's just too painful. This time we > decided to give the Ubuntu config a try, and then just disable what we > know will not be used. > > If possible, we'd like to continue using it, and change as needed to > disable whatever you think it shouldn't be there. OK, lets see how it goes. I would like to keep the ubuntu-minimal.conf around and supported, if for no other that selfish reasons as it produces a much smaller (quicker to load) kernel and quicker builds, which is useful for anyone wanting to basic kernel development and testing. (In an ideal world it could be used on nano and developer images but that isn't worth the complexity of a second kernel package and hwpack.) -- Tixy _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
