Hi,
OpenEmbedded-Core/meta-linaro:
* added a default xorg.conf for the qemuarmv7a MACHINE
* necessary because OE-Core master switched from Xfbdev to Xorg
* noticed that hard float with Linaro GCC 4.6 works on denzil but is
broken on master
due to differences on the requested/provided interpreter
* it used to (accidentally?) work when /lib/ld-linux.so.3 was used
even for armhf
* need to check out what loader name OE-Core really wants to use
* worked on getting OE-Core to build with Linaro GCC 4.7
* verified that the recipes for Linaro GCC 4.7 are working for ARM,
MIPS, PPC, X86, X86_64
* all images are working!
* updated the wiki pages
Regards,
Ken
Linaro Connect edition...
RAG:
GREEN: productive Connect, hammered out a KVM TODO list
* As usual, most sessions don't really intersect with KVM/QEMU work,
so the bulk of the benefit of the week was in informal discussions
and hacking sessions. Useful outcomes there:
* Dragged Rusty through some of the more obscure corners of the
ARM architecture, in the course of doing a review of all the
A15 cp15 registers and how KVM should handle them
* Thrashed out a todo list for getting to "initial upstreamable
patchset" for KVM:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TSpDKQZ-6u-HH_2BNY_85jDStI2YDhENf5-z8Nb…
* Nailed down a few decisions we'd left hanging for a bit
* A few sessions that seem worth mentioning:
* Enterprise bootloaders
Jon M definitely pushing the idea that servers will want ACPI,
UEFI, etc all to look as consistent and like x86 as possible. This
includes a desire for UEFI in the virtual environment provided by
QEMU/KVM. We've been aware we might want to do that, but there is
definitely some work to do to get UEFI running (probably a combo of
QEMU bugfixes/feature work and patching UEFI). Total work required
hard to estimate because you just have to keep fixing bugs until it
works... (The push for UEFI was repeated in a couple of other
sessions too.)
* v8 discussion
The question of whether there will be a v8 QEMU was raised (again).
There do seem to be enough people interested that we should be able
to collaborate on a user-mode emulator, which I think is a good
outcome. This will obviously depend on release of enough public
info on the architecture.
* KVM performance
Bit of a null session, as it turns out that we aren't really ready
to think about performance. We believe there aren't any obvious
areas requiring optimisation in the current KVM patchset. Virtio is
the only thing to be added later, and this is really just missing
QEMU side rather than needing specific kernel support. We did take
the opportunity to go through our TODO list for KVM functionality;
nobody raised anything we'd missed, so that's good.
-- PMM
