Status of the linaro-2.6.38 kernel

Grant Likely grant.likely at secretlab.ca
Mon Mar 28 15:34:50 UTC 2011


On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Nicolas Pitre
<nicolas.pitre at linaro.org> wrote:
[...]> Given those issues, I decided to rebuild the linaro-2.6.38 branch from
> scratch to see where that would bring me.  And as could be expected, the
> result looks nicer and it is much easier to work with than the current
> tree.  For example, this allowed me to merge the latest OMAP support
> from mainline as is, including the latest fixes, without any need for
> backport work nor major conflict resolution.  Another advantage is that
> the commit SHA1 references are now identical in most cases to what can
> be found into mainline.
>
> So... my question is: should we switch to this rebuilt tree or not?
> There are drawbacks with such a move of course:
>
>  - All the testing done so far would be void.  This is however not as
>   bad as this may look as the rebuilt kernel contains fixes for existing
>   bugs in the current tree, and the rebuilt kernel is using patches
>   that have and still are being tested by a wider community.
>
>  - I didn't forward port a couple series of patches that are available
>   in the current Linaro tree and not in mainline yet, including:
>    * DT support (Grant Likely)

I'm based on 2.6.38 in my devicetree/test branch anyway so it isn't a
problem to republish my changes if so desired.

I do have concerns.  It changes my current workflow on some of the DT
enablement patches, and I'm mildly concerned about the loss of test
coverage, but neither concern weighs heavily enough on my mind to
raise an objection.

g.



More information about the linaro-kernel mailing list