On 13 July 2017 at 05:25, Bruce Ashfield <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2017-07-04 11:29 AM, Nathan Rossi wrote:
>>
>> Most of this configuration has existed in the meta-xilinx layer for
>> quite some time for use with linux-yocto and Xilinx's vendor tree
>> kernel, linux-xlnx.
>>
>> The goal is to enable the use of the MicroBlaze architecture in OE-Core
>> including the addition of QEMU machines (qemumicroblazeel,
>> qemumicroblazeeb), this relies on having configuration for the BSPs in
>> linux-yocto. This series adds the BSP configs for these machines
>> including both standard and tiny kernel types, as well as fragments for
>> configuring Xilinx Soft IP drivers.
>>
>> Also included are Zynq SoC configuration fragments and a generalised
>> machine config (targeting the SoC for both standard and tiny kernel
>> types).
>>
>> Support for MicroBlaze and Zynq has been available in upstream and
>> linux-yocto for a number of releases. This series does not require any
>> patching of the kernel source to enable any functionality of the target
>> BSPs and is purely kernel configuration.
>>
>> Additionally included in this series is a fragment for debug purposes
>> that enables the kernels DEBUG_DYNAMIC feature.
>>
>
> These are really clean, and self documenting. I wouldn't have a problem
> carrying these along with the main kernel-cache branches.
>
> I don't have the h/w .. so obviously you'd control all the updates (and
> any necessary fixes) that weren't clear to me (i.e. options that have
> disappeared, or dependency issues, I can handle).

With the qemumicroblaze* targets in the future once all changes have
been applied to oe-core you should be able to test them with just qemu
if needed.

But I am good to keep a look out on changes to the linux-yocto kernel
and test/validate for these configs.

>
> I had one question about the BE machine, but that is mostly for my
> information only.
>
> I'll queue these up for my 4.10 and master branch (which is now 4.12+
> for linux-yocto-dev).

I had not yet tested these with 4.10 (which is reason why RFC), though
just tested against v4.10/-dev and all looks good.

However there are some minor changes that are needed for 4.12 as these
cfgs were targeting 4.11 and earlier. I will send a follow up patch
once sorted to handle the 4.12 differences.

Thanks,
Nathan
-- 
_______________________________________________
linux-yocto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto

Reply via email to