From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 34793E00A65; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:40:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [209.85.192.176 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com (mail-pd0-f176.google.com [209.85.192.176]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99BFFE00957 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:40:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pdbci14 with SMTP id ci14so12713101pdb.2 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:40:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=LRcgux2Xu26Ey1IRs7Y/3fKIOz5gET11FbYIcGfHiUg=; b=d1HP5sZwOYca2IWFJPaDXlYj7v7OgyqWXObBMEXcy8Yk0NquFJOVgrmvXg6PHtj2n6 yQcuh2DE5YhCcKfBqw41Nz8zhlTKI6/JkkNPwf3oTd23PvZQrCNekGzKbKRZhg2j1Vpo JBTWlHzQCgcBwDStAuuEtwjoxtHj8ueQyUXw9Bm425kyezSGxh8Jr0HKZA4WiRIPe4Nq hAiGX6nwmVcmYBXKtelvaZhSP8hRuGV2Ga/2ddf38+gb0yDD4c1toNNXxTtmY4qV9CTh b7YfqPar52E7440V5ravQCcUE94aJOK26Ss9FClhwyRUJCLuFVYMLFLTcNJTnfFozh1F c/vw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.167.197 with SMTP id zq5mr23387043pbb.85.1434649240078; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:40:40 -0700 (PDT) Sender: otavio.salvador@gmail.com Received: by 10.70.34.109 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:40:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5582FB97.5060300@mail.bg> References: <1434564146-11377-1-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <1434564146-11377-3-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <5581BC50.5020504@mail.bg> <5581BE95.9060009@mail.bg> <5581C98C.8060802@mail.bg> <5582FB97.5060300@mail.bg> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 14:40:39 -0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: B40J_Cq6gk3r45Ws1yZkaCPfxdk Message-ID: From: Otavio Salvador To: Nikolay Dimitrov Cc: meta-freescale Mailing List Subject: Re: [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH 3/4] linux-fslc-mx6 (3.14-1.0.x): Add recipe X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:40:43 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov wrote: > On 06/18/2015 04:58 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> linux-fslc_4.0.bb linux-fslc-mx6_3.14-1.0.x.bb >> >> or >> >> linux-fslc_4.0.bb linux-fslc_3.14-1.0.x-mx6.bb > > > Understood. Then here's my proposal, which I hope aligns with what you > already outlined: > > 1. Drop SOC name from the provider name > ...in order to have more SOCs benefit from the same efforts. First, > patches in non-soc-specific common areas can be reused as-is (ext4 > patches anyone :D?), and second, it would be great to have 1 repository > where all these efforts are concentrated, not separate for each separate > SoC (also, there are drivers for IP-blocks which are reused 1:1 across > SoCs). > > 2. Make sure the provider name doesn't contain a delimited string of > "fsl", "imx" or "mx" > ... to make sure the provider is not confused with the FSL provider, and > to give due credit to the upstream + community efforts. > > 3. Drop the GA release version from the provider name > ...for several reasons: > - it will limit the ability to merge patches from different GA releases > (if/when such need arises) > - to not confuse it with FSL GA releases > - sooner or later due to upstream patches merged this code will be > further and further away from the FSL release point. > > So I think that a provider name like... > > linux-fslc_3.14.28 > linux-fslc_3.17.4 > linux-fslc_4.0 > > ...seems practical. > > (I can only make the educated guess that "fslc" = "Freescale community", but > "fsl-community" really seems quite long). Yes, "fslc" stands for FSL Community. There are reasons behind the use of another provider, the main ones are: - avoid use of version pinning (PREFERRED_VERSION_...); - make the SoC it targets explicit; The 3.14.28-1.0.0-GA has only been tested on the *boards* listed in the release notes. If you take this and use it in another board, this is not supported by Freescale. In case you take the 3.14.28-1.0.0-GA kernel and use it in another SoC, it is at your risk. Freescale does not test the code changes on the other SoCs so even if some IP components are shared they were not tested and even checked when the changes in the drivers and architecture code were done. In summary the linux-fslc-mx6 is now a 3.14.44 kernel which merges 3.14.28-1.0.0-GA and should ONLY be used for i.MX6 SoCs. There is no test or check of this tree for another SoCs. The shared tree for all SoCs are the ones we maintain based on mainline (4.0, 4.1...) and this can be expected to work on all SoCs. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750