On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 11:01:20AM +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote: > > > 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?
Generally, I'd like it that the distribution flavor avoided specifying hardware support config, as Tixy says. I realize this clashes with the goal to stay as close as possible to the stock distro configuration, but that's also not a end-goal in itself -- ideally, Ubuntu adopts config fragments themselves and leaves the hardware-specific configs to be enabled by board frags. Is there a way we can achieve this without causing more problems than we are solving? -- Christian Robottom Reis, Engineering VP Brazil (GMT-3) | [+55] 16 9112 6430 | [+1] 612 216 4935 Linaro.org: Open Source Software for ARM SoCs _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
