On Mon, 2015-10-19 at 11:59 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: > Use 'atom' as an alias for the first generation Intel Atom CPUs. > --- > meta/conf/machine/include/tune-atom.inc | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-atom.inc > b/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-atom.inc > index 5e1bb74..24cd676 100644 > --- a/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-atom.inc > +++ b/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-atom.inc > @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ > -# Atom tunings are the same as core2 for now... > -require conf/machine/include/tune-core2.inc > +# Alias for the first generation of Intel Atom CPUs. > +require conf/machine/include/tune-bonnell.inc
This is actually pretty nasty to anyone who uses package feeds or packages since all of a sudden, the system rebuilds with a completely different package architecture. Not sure we can take this change for that reason. I'd also like to understand how much of a difference these specific tunes actually give. I know the Intel people have been trying to focus on a smaller number of tunes that work well on the majority of platforms rather than micro optimising the tunes. Are there some benchmark numbers or other analysis which shows these tunes as being more effective? Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
