On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Chris Simmonds chris.simmonds@2net.co.uk wrote:
Hello,
I am working on behalf of an SoC vendor and I am trying to work out which (if any) of the many git trees at http://git.linaro.org/gitweb we should
Is this a new SoC (no mainline support) or an existing SoC?
base our work on. I would like to use the Linaro code base because the arch/arm support is ahead of mainline. But I also need a degree of stability.
Ideally I would like a "long term support" Linaro kernel. Since that doesn't exist, one approach is use the linux-linaro-tracking tree but only use the linux-linaro-3.0* tagged versions so that we can easily merge in changes from v3.0 from kernel.org linux-stable.
LTSI is something that is work in progress by the Linux Foundation. But that is directed towards products shipping with already enabled SoCs. I don't think it is a good tree to follow for new SoC enablement.
So my questions are
- Is this a rational approach?
IMHO, you should be developing against mainline, say the last released kernel 3.3, if tracking 3.4-rc is too much. And then ask for it to be merged via the arm-soc tree if you have no other sub-arch maintainer above you.
- Is this how you imagine other projects interfacing with Linaro? Or should
we really be waiting for Linaro code to be mainlined and pulling from kernel.org?
If you need specific features from the Linaro tree, you should use git branches to track the tree and cherry-pick the bits that you do need. Can you give examples of things that you do need from the Linaro tree?
/Amit