[Linaro-dev] Second "Linaro kernel merge result of the moment" aka "arm_next" published

[John Rigby]

Two things:
1) leaving the Ubuntu stuff out is fine with me.
2) What config works with this.  I have only tried building with
Ubuntu configs which I had to update.  I just took the default for the
new stuff.  With that I get weird errors in some scsi driver.  Looks
like I just need to turn it off for arm:

/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/kernelbuild/linux/drivers/scsi/ips.c:210:
warning: #warning "This driver has only been tested on the
x86/ia64/x86_64 platforms"
  CC [M]  drivers/scsi/megaraid.o
  CC [M]  drivers/scsi/initio.o
  CC [M]  drivers/scsi/a100u2w.o
  CC [M]  drivers/scsi/3w-xxxx.o
  CC [M]  drivers/scsi/3w-9xxx.o
  CC [M]  drivers/scsi/3w-sas.o
  CC [M]  drivers/scsi/libsrp.o
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/kernelbuild/linux/drivers/scsi/3w-9xxx.c:
In function 'twa_interrupt':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/kernelbuild/linux/drivers/scsi/3w-9xxx.c:1246:
error: expected expression before 'do'
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/kernelbuild/linux/drivers/scsi/3w-9xxx.c:1253:
error: expected expression before 'do'
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/kernelbuild/linux/drivers/scsi/3w-9xxx

John

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Nicolas Pitre
<nicolas.pitre at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Loïc Minier wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > I'm wondering if we can split the merged ARM kernel tree from the
>> > Ubuntu patches. I'm not normally building ubuntu packages when
>> > trying out kernels, and a lot of the stuff in the ubuntu tree
>> > is not heading for mainline inclusion any time soon.
>> >
>> > Obviously we need the ubuntu+linaro tree as well, especially
>> > to build the packages, but I'm personally more interested in
>> > the linaro (minus ubuntu) patches that are headed upstream.
>>
>>  I'm +1 on this; it's something which has bugged me for a while.
>
> OK, I have no problem with that.  I don't know the Ubuntu kernel tree
> well myself.  I initially thought about merging it as it could contain
> generic features that the Linaro kernel could benefit from.  But I don't
> know exactly what those are.  And I also wanted to shake out any merge
> issues in the perspective of having the Linaro tree merged back into the
> Ubuntu kernel tree at some point before a release.  Maybe it is best to
> keep the Ubuntu kernel free from the Linaro stuff after all.  In either
> cases I don't have a strong opinion.
>
>>  We need a version of the tree with the Ubuntu stuff merged, as to
>>  prepare Ubuntu packages, but our official main arm_next doesn't need to
>>  carry the non-upstream Ubuntu bits.  (Carrying the Ubuntu bits which
>>  are going upstream soon is useful though.)
>
> They would need to be in a separate branch in the Maverick repository.
>
>>  It's an extra burden, but we want arm_next.git to be upstreamish.  I
>>  think John Rigby and Nicolas should see how to best handle the Ubuntu
>>  bits, but our tree should look like an official upstream linux tree
>>  with additional good stuff and sugar on top.  :-)
>
> OK.  I'll kick out the Maverick branch from the next rebuild.
>
>
> Nicolas
> _______________________________________________
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev at lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>
>