[meta-xilinx] [PATCH 0/5] Use kernel device tree when we can

[Joe Nicholson]

Hi Nathan

We're still using linux-xlnx 3.14 on one project.  We're quite keen to move
to mainline, but for us to be able to it needs PL support and a higher
performance Ethernet driver (we had to move from macb to Emacps to get the
transfer speeds we needed).  

Are these now merged into linux-yocto?  If so, no objections at all!

Cheers!

Joe


-----Original Message-----
From: meta-xilinx-bounces at yoctoproject.org
[mailto:meta-xilinx-bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Rossi
Sent: 05 November 2015 02:07
To: Manjukumar Harthikote Matha <manjukumar.harthikote-matha at xilinx.com>
Cc: meta-xilinx at yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [meta-xilinx] [PATCH 0/5] Use kernel device tree when we can

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha
<manjukumar.harthikote-matha at xilinx.com> wrote:
> On 11/04/2015 04:08 PM, Nathan Rossi wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Manjukumar Matha 
>> <manjukumar.harthikote-matha at xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> This series simplifies some meta-xilinx machine definitions by 
>>> removing their device tree files and using the kernel device tree 
>>> definitions instead.
>>
>>
>> These changes are definitely the goal, however due to some 
>> in-consistency with the device trees in older kernels (v3.19) 
>> meta-xilinx is not quite ready to do the switch over. Before doing 
>> these changes I was planning on getting the meta-xilinx device trees 
>> moved over to the same base include that is used in the kernel.
>> Alongside those changes I was looking into deprecating the whole 
>> conf/machine/boards in favour of a more standardized BSP layout, so 
>> as to better set-up for supporting more boards/machines.
>>
>
> Thanks.
>
> What has been the practice so far on maintaining/dropping support for 
> earlier kernels? For instance, could we drop support for v3.14 (and 
> maybe
> v3.19) on jethro? We can of course continue supporting both versions 
> on fido.

There has not been any specific rules/practices, i've just gone with the
flow. However I would like to reduce the number of linux-xlnx kernel
versions that are kept around across releases. For jethro I don't plan on
dropping any kernel versions (primarily due to timing), but I planning to
drop the linux-xlnx 3.14 and 3.19 recipes afterwards (as long as there are
no objections), but linux-yocto will still have
3.14 and 3.19 at least for now so dropping them purely to achieve the kernel
dts goal is a bit problematic, maybe once 3.14 is gone minimal patching of
linux-yocto 3.19 will put us on track for kernel device trees.

Regards,
Nathan

>
>> Also the zybo device trees are missing some nodes (in linux-xlnx and 
>> mainline), so that one should still use the layers dts for now.
>>
> Thanks for the heads up on Zybo.
> We will work on this issue and get linux-xlnx updated
>
> Thanks
> Manju
>
>
--
_______________________________________________
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx at yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx