Thanks. Amit.
2011/3/9 Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org:
On 09/03/11 02:44, Barry Song wrote:
Thanks. Amit.
2011/3/8 Amit Kucheria amit.kucheria@linaro.org:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Barry Song 21cnbao@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Lee, Great! Thanks a lot. It looks like the communication between linaro and mainline is that linaro can backport some bug fixes and features from mainline to linaro tree. Linaro doesn't help to review patches and send to mainline.
We prefer to see it this way:
Develop against mainline and get those features integrated there. Keep linaro-dev in cc if these are features might be something Linaro would care about.
The Linaro kernel (maintained by Nicolas Pitre and packaged by John Rigby) is a sort of technology demonstration to show what we achieve every 6 months. Some patches in it are backports, others are features that are still under review in mainline. But I doubt if Nicolas will take un-reviewed code directly into his tree.
Then I have two more questions
- is there a detailed list of backport and bug fix in linaro kernel
tree since those are the difference between mainline and linaro tree?
'git log' with the right incantations should be able to tell you that. Look up Nicolas' email announcements for the high-level overview of what he has integrated.
- will linaro accept patches from non-member companies and help to
maintain, I mean a SoC company which doesn't join linaro?
Linaro doesn't want to maintain dead code that isn't going upstream. It won't even do it for member companies. At most it is the incubator where the code lives and gets wider testing _while_ it is being reworked for mainline.
If patches are going mainline, but they are not from members TI, Freescale, ST-E etc, can they be merged into linaro kernel?
I don't see any reason why not, but the overall decision will be made by Nico.
That's important to market. In case customers of TI, Freescale, ST-E are also using SoC from non-member companies, since they are using linaro kernel and utilitis well on TI/Freescale/ST-E, they want to use the same linaro kernel on non-member chips, if linaro accepts and maintains non-member patches, then this tree can be useful and customers can use the only tree as their platform to support both member chips and non-member chips.
If so, maybe SoC companies don't need to join linaro, but they can get the benefit of linaro too. So what's the opinion of Nico?