On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Andrei Gherzan <and...@gherzan.ro> wrote:
> Hi all, > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Andreas Müller <schnitzelt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Mirza Krak <mirza.k...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 2017-12-14 9:41 GMT+01:00 Andreas Müller <schnitzelt...@gmail.com>: >>> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:58 AM, Sherif Omran < >>> sherifomran2...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> hey guys, >>> >> >>> >> any body tried the real time kernel? I get an error, it is snot in the >>> >> compatibility list. >>> >> can we skip it? >>> >> >>> >> thanks >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> > >>> > Good news: I use RT kernel only together with VC4 graphics and have >>> lots of >>> > fun on PI2/3. >>> > Bad news: As far as I know it is not in meta-raspberrypi but in my >>> fork [1]. >>> > There were attempts to land the RT-patches in meta-raspberrypi but >>> that was >>> > denied for huge patch size :( >>> >>> If the patch size was the only problem one can pull it by doing the >>> following in the recipe: >>> >>> SRC_URI += " \ >>> https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/4.9/patc >>> h-4.9.65-rt56.patch.gz;name=rt-patch >>> \ >>> " >>> >>> SRC_URI[rt-patch.md5sum] = "9caa7b541d8c84c2d5c5f58985982e95" >>> SRC_URI[rt-patch.sha256sum] = >>> "47dfb518c78d8cbaafd4ab9130eb26fe0170be9189b580ab26209ef679309539" >>> >>> Note that above sums are "random" and not the for the actually file >>> but are there for reference. >>> >>> That way you do not need to keep a copy of it in meta-raspberrypi. >>> >>> -- >>> >> Hi Mirza, >> >> Problem is that patches need alignments sometimes either caused by >> Raspberry-Pi-specific adjustments or versions not matching exactly - RT >> kernel patch updates are less frequent than kernel updates. Anyway: git is >> very good at maintaining huge text content and this should not be a problem >> these days. Another discussion about RT kernel was to have an extra kernel >> for it and I never understood why. To me that seems nothing but an extra >> maintenance burden. >> >> However - just wrote to Paul: I plan to be at FOSDEM and we can discuss >> there how to get back to one layer only (not mine!) making everybody happy >> :) >> >> > I remember the discussion. Indeed that was the reason and the > recommendation was to maintain a separate linux-raspberry fork where > whoever has interest in this will maintain on top of linux-raspberrypi this > patch. Obviously that didn't happen but I'd like to see it landing. > > Yes that was one of the suggestions which made me say 'Thanks - this is just additional maintenance burden and will not work for long time - I do my own'. FWIW: That suggestion came at a time when you (Andrei) seemed overworked totally (just to mention - PLEASE don't take it as criticism - I know what I am talking of when it comes to 'overworked'). Why not simply one stable kernel with RT-patches applied if user decides by an option? That is what I am doing for >1 year now and meta-raspi-light is the one which caused me least efforts/headaches of all. And yes I know I made life easy here by removing userland completely and taking care for RPi2/3 only. Cheers, Andreas
-- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
