Greetings,
Moving to v3.4 release caused one conflict in drivers/dma/pl330.c when
merging the Samsung LT's topic/core. I've emailed the details to Tushar
for review.
My conflict resolutions didn't work for Origen, so the following fix has
been added (via the "last-minute-fixes" topic):
commit
.
OK
Please ignore this one then:
Original Message ----
Subject: Re: 12.05 linux-linaro kernel tree
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 21:19:06 +0400
From: Andrey Konovalov
To: Deepti Kalakeri
CC: Andy Green , "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)"
, linaro-dev
Guess we should continue to build linux-linaro and
Hi Deepti,
On 05/22/2012 10:10 AM, Deepti Kalakeri wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Andrey Konovalov
mailto:andrey.konova...@linaro.org>> wrote:
On 05/17/2012 06:40 PM, Andy Green wrote:
On 17/05/12 17:41, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Thu, 2012-
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Deepti Kalakeri
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Andrey Konovalov
> wrote:
>>
>> On 05/17/2012 06:40 PM, Andy Green wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17/05/12 17:41, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konova
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Andrey Konovalov <
andrey.konova...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 05/17/2012 06:40 PM, Andy Green wrote:
>
>> On 17/05/12 17:41, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>>>
Greetings,
So
On 22/05/12 04:02, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Andy Green wrote:
On 11/05/12 08:27, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
4. in between RCs, we only move mainline on our linux-linaro release
baseline forward if we see a working tracking
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Andy Green wrote:
> On 11/05/12 08:27, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
>> 4. in between RCs, we only move mainline on our linux-linaro release
>> baseline forward if we see a working tracking build that wouldn't drop
>> any topics that already made i
Greetings,
Changes since last Friday, May 18:
* new ubuntu-sauce topic added
* new umm_fixes topic added (one patch from the Samsung LT to fix
kernel panic while booting Android on Origen board)
* the tree has been moved from v3.4-rc7 to v3.4 release
Moving to v3.4 release caused one conflict
On 05/18/2012 10:57 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Samsung LT's topics:
> topic/base topic/core topic/bl topic/dt topic/fb topic/pd topic/s2ram
> topic/asv_cpufreq topic/led topic/dummy_reg topic/gadget topic/touch
> topic/wlan topic/audio topic/hdmi topic/mfc topic/mali
> topic/cma_origen topic/and
Greetings,
Here is the list of the topics currently included into the 12.05
linux-linaro tree (v3.4-rc7 based):
Generic topics:
ufs (ufs-for-linux-linaro)
emmc (emmc-for-linux-linaro)
thermal_exynos4_imx6 (thermal_exynos4_imx6_work)
linaro-android-3.4
armlt-gator (tracking-armlt-gator)
umm-wip
Hi Tushar,
On 05/17/2012 01:06 PM, Tushar Behera wrote:
On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Samsung:
topic/base topic/core topic/bl topic/dt topic/fb topic/pd
topic/s2ram topic/asv_cpufreq topic/led topic/dummy_reg
topic/gadget topic/touch topic/wlan topic/audio topic/hd
On 17/05/12 23:01, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 22:40 +0800, Andy Green wrote:
On 17/05/12 17:41, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 18:59 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Have pushed to the linux-linaro some time ago
Thanks Andrey.
--
Tixy
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 22:40 +0800, Andy Green wrote:
> On 17/05/12 17:41, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >> Greetings,
> >>
> >> So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
> >> (The generic top
On 05/17/2012 06:40 PM, Andy Green wrote:
On 17/05/12 17:41, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
(The generic topic updates were being done to th
On 17/05/12 17:41, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
(The generic topic updates were being done to the
linux-linaro-core-tracking tree)
Now it
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
> (The generic topic updates were being done to the
> linux-linaro-core-tracking tree)
>
> Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tre
On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Samsung:
>topic/base topic/core topic/bl topic/dt topic/fb topic/pd
>topic/s2ram topic/asv_cpufreq topic/led topic/dummy_reg
>topic/gadget topic/touch topic/wlan topic/audio topic/hdmi
>topic/mali topic/cma_v24 topic/android_config
>
On 15/05/12 23:01, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
If it's the case that stuff in linaro tree is more upstream-converged than
what Tushar's tree works with, then we can put it another way: the current
implementation in Samsung tree (no ding intended since it can just as easily
be any
On 15 May 2012 04:33, Alexander Sack wrote:
> Hi Tushar,
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Tushar Behera
> wrote:
>> On 14 May 2012 13:40, Tushar Behera wrote:
>>> On 05/12/2012 11:09 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Tushar,
On 05/11/2012 09:04 AM, Tushar Behera wrote:
> On 05/
On 15 May 2012 08:17, Andy Green wrote:
> On 15/05/12 07:03, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
>>> While migrating the Android solution to use linux-linaro-core-tracking, I
>>> get kernel panic with umm-patchset (haven't dug deep into it though, it
>>> might be because the multimedia dr
On 15/05/12 07:03, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
While migrating the Android solution to use linux-linaro-core-tracking, I
get kernel panic with umm-patchset (haven't dug deep into it though, it
might be because the multimedia drivers are not yet migrated for using UMM).
Would it be
Hi Tushar,
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Tushar Behera wrote:
> On 14 May 2012 13:40, Tushar Behera wrote:
>> On 05/12/2012 11:09 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>>> Tushar,
>>>
>>> On 05/11/2012 09:04 AM, Tushar Behera wrote:
On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Greetings,
On 14 May 2012 13:40, Tushar Behera wrote:
> On 05/12/2012 11:09 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>> Tushar,
>>
>> On 05/11/2012 09:04 AM, Tushar Behera wrote:
>>> On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 re
On 05/12/2012 11:09 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Tushar,
>
> On 05/11/2012 09:04 AM, Tushar Behera wrote:
>> On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
>>> (The generic topic updates were being don
On 05/11/2012 09:13 AM, Andy Green wrote:
On 11/05/12 13:04, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
(The generic topic updates were being done to the
linux-lin
Tushar,
On 05/11/2012 09:04 AM, Tushar Behera wrote:
On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
(The generic topic updates were being done to the
linux-linaro-core-tracking tree)
Now it is time to move the
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 11:44 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 02:27 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy)
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 02:27 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
>> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
>> >> the current one performs best and is on a random
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 11:38 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Forgot to Cc the list..
>
> 11.05.2012 11:37, Andrey Konovalov написал:
> > 11.05.2012 02:09, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) написал:
> >> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >>> Now it is time to move the focus to the linu
Forgot to Cc the list..
11.05.2012 11:37, Andrey Konovalov написал:
11.05.2012 02:09, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) написал:
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one week
it will use the mainline tip as the base. Then,
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 02:27 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
> >> the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit, we
> >> certainly shouldn't wind it backwards to last
On 11/05/12 13:04, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
(The generic topic updates were being done to the
linux-linaro-core-tracking tree)
Now it is time to
On 05/11/2012 01:04 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
> (The generic topic updates were being done to the
> linux-linaro-core-tracking tree)
>
> Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one we
On 11/05/12 10:19, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 3:43 AM, Andy Green wrote:
On 11/05/12 08:27, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
4. in between RCs, we only move mainline on our linux-linaro release
baseline forward if we see a working tracking b
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 3:43 AM, Andy Green wrote:
> On 11/05/12 08:27, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
>> 4. in between RCs, we only move mainline on our linux-linaro release
>> baseline forward if we see a working tracking build that wouldn't drop
>> any topics that already made it
On 11/05/12 08:27, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
4. in between RCs, we only move mainline on our linux-linaro release
baseline forward if we see a working tracking build that wouldn't drop
any topics that already made it into this RC cycle.
The probability of getting a good unif
On 11/05/12 08:32, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Andy Green wrote:
On 11/05/12 07:43, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit,
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Andy Green wrote:
> On 11/05/12 07:43, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>>
>> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
>>>
>>> the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit, we
>>> certainly shouldn't wind it backwards to last
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
>> the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit, we
>> certainly shouldn't wind it backwards to last -rc that performs worse
>> just because that's "easier to commun
On 11/05/12 07:43, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit, we
certainly shouldn't wind it backwards to last -rc that performs worse
just because that's "easier to communicate".
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 07:14 +0800, Andy Green wrote:If
> the current one performs best and is on a random HEAD commit, we
> certainly shouldn't wind it backwards to last -rc that performs worse
> just because that's "easier to communicate".
I agree, I wasn't envisioning winding backwards, more
On 11/05/12 06:57, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 00:46 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro t
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 00:46 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >> Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one week
> >> it will use the mainline tip as t
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>> Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one week
>> it will use the mainline tip as the base. Then, on next Thursday the
>> most recent -rc will be se
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 23:34 +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one week
> it will use the mainline tip as the base. Then, on next Thursday the
> most recent -rc will be selected as the base, and won't be changed until
> 12.05 is releas
Greetings,
So far I wasn't updating the linux-linaro tree since the 12.04 release.
(The generic topic updates were being done to the
linux-linaro-core-tracking tree)
Now it is time to move the focus to the linux-linaro tree. For one week
it will use the mainline tip as the base. Then, on nex
47 matches
Mail list logo
