On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > On 01/07/2018 07:55 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>> On 01/07/2018 06:55 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>>> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>> On 01/07/2018 05:42 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 11:38 AM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>>> On 01/07/2018 05:37 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Add additional task, do_patch_xenomai, inserted between do_patch and >>>>>>>>> do_configure tasks. This task applies the cobalt patch to the kernel >>>>>>>>> sources for a specific machine. This is disabled by default, so use >>>>>>>>> PACKAGECONFIG[xenomai] of the kernel package to enable the patching. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You will also need a kernel recipe for a kernel version with ipipe >>>>>>>>> patch applied. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This doesn't make any sense to me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why on earth would this be in kernel.bbclass ? and part of a xenomai >>>>>>>> recipe ? >>>>>>> Do you have a better suggestion how to make this easily available for >>>>>>> every kernel recipe ? >>>>>> >>>>>> There's no need to make it available for every kernel recipe. If someone >>>>>> wants to build xenomai, they need to have a specific kernel recipe and >>>>>> configuration to make it work. By providing that patch and allowing it to >>>>>> be applied to any kernel doesn't mean it will actually work .. so you >>>>>> aren't >>>>>> doing anyone any favours. >>>>>> >>>>>> The same thing could be said for the -rt patch, aufs, etc, any patch >>>>>> could >>>>>> be made available for any kernel, but they aren't, since they will >>>>>> either fail >>>>>> to patch, or won't work at runtime. >>>>> We actually have a -rt patch available in the kernel recipes, so why not >>>>> xenomai patch ? >>>> >>>> As a separate recipe, not as something in a common bbclass, which implies >>>> that it applies and works everywhere. >>>> >>>> Anyone that is trying to apply -rt against a generic kernel .. is very >>>> mistaken. >>> >>> So I should pull this into linux-*-xenomai , just like the rt patch does? >> >> Yep. >> >> But how it is maintained is a RP question, oe-core has a set of reference >> kernel >> versions, and those reference kernels have a similar set of functionality >> across >> architectures, are actively maintained and all get the same fixes at >> the same time. >> >> (and I just realized that RP isn't copied on this thread anymore, so I'm >> adding >> him). >> >> If we introduce something like this, I'd argue that it needs to follow the >> same >> kernel versions to be consistent with the other oe-core references. >> >> That is a question for the steering committee and the architecture mailing >> list. >> >> So while that happens, why not just put this in a meta-xenomai for the time >> being and once all the details have been hammered out, it could merge. > That's fine by me, although the main feedback I'm currently interested > in is whether this has any chance of getting included in oe-core and if > there are some other big issues with this .
There has been interest in this in the past, which is why I've gone down the route of getting things up and running myself. The real feedback and feasibility would be in those other forums, but if done right, I don't see why not myself. Bruce > > -- > Best regards, > Marek Vasut -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end" -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
