Config fragment for Versatile Express

[Tushar Behera]

On 04/03/2012 01:43 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 12:30 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
>> The difficulty is that as Tixy earlier pointed out, are that the LT 
>> kernel trees are mainline based, and thus aren't based off of something 
>> that would contain the base/distro/board config fragments.
>>
>> One approach we might be able to use is if the board defconfigs really 
>> are minimal, and restricted in scope to only the board options, we could 
>> switch the merge order (board/distro/base). This way the LT's "additive" 
>> defconfig can be used (from arch/arm/configs/ ) and we can still also 
>> get consistent generic options as well.
> 
> The mainline defconfigs aren't minimal in the sense we want, they
> include things like file-systems and networking options so somebody can
> build a usable kernel, and I think it's sensible to keep it that way.
> 
> For Linaro's purposes we would need a new board config. We could make
> that minimal, but we get back to the idea that topic branches which
> change configs would need to sit on top of the topic with this config.
> Perhaps that is something we can live with if a
> directory-of-config-fragments approach is deemed undesirable.
> 
> It's a pity that the title of the thread possibly means no one from
> other LTs are reading. (Probably a bit late to change it now and get
> noticed.)
> 
I hope not.

For Samsung LT kernel, we have followed an approach where in the commits
in John's linaro_config_3.3 branch are taken to be stable commits and we
have put those commits as the very first set of commits on LT kernel.
Our LT kernel being a _serialized_ kernel where topic branches sit one
over the other, the related config fragments are made part of the topic
branches.

A sample view of the same is posted at [1].

[1] git://git.linaro.org/landing-teams/working/samsung/kernel.git (lt/next)

-- 
Tushar Behera