On 7/23/19 10:32 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 9:20 AM Yunguo Wei <yunguo....@windriver.com> wrote:

在 2019/7/23 21:03, qwang2 写道:
On 7/23/19 8:41 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 1:29 AM qwang2 <quanyang.w...@windriver.com>
On 7/22/19 11:34 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 1:24 AM <quanyang.w...@windriver.com> wrote:
From: Quanyang Wang <quanyang.w...@windriver.com>

Hi Bruce,

Would you please help merge these 2 patches to linux-yocto-dev
standard/xlnx-soc branch?
I've merged the patches.

Also note: I'm about to move linux-yocto-dev to v5.3-rc1, so I've
created a set of v5.2 branches in the main linux-yocto repository, and
I have merged the xlnx-soc work there.

So if you can try switching to:


The content is the same as the linux-yocto-dev branch.

I'm going to generate linux-yocto_5.2 recipes shortly, but they aren't
quite ready yet. Contact me if you have trouble building that branch
without the recipes and I  can send you the in progress ones.

Also, if you do a port to 5.3, let me know and we can re-establish the
branch in linux-yocto-dev.
Hi Bruce,

I will do a port to 5.3.  But before I finish porting, I hope we can
retain the branch standard/xlnx-soc
I have 5.3-rc1 building and booting with the base set of features now.

Is there a reason why the branch I created in linux-yocto/5.2 won't
work while you are doing the port ? I'd like to push the 5.3 kernel
changes in the next day or so, and they will clobber that branch.
Hi Bruce,

For me, I plan to begin porting to 5.3 after I fix bugs and enable the

features. So I hope to maintain this branch in linux-yocto-dev but not
only linux-yocto.

But if retaining this branch bring inconvience, you can delete it.

I will switch to linux-yocto/5.2 to do the fixing bug.

Another reason is we have some test always tracking on
linux-yocto-dev/standard/xlnx-soc, rather than
There might be a gap between 5.3 changes is pushed and port for v5.3 is
done. So the xlnx SDK full features can't be tested during that time.

But anyway, please go ahead with your change if that is a standard
procedure, we will tune our internal plan accordingly. And we will do
Outside of the repo being different, and the branch having a v5.2/
prefix, the content is identical between linux-yocto-dev and the
linux-yocto tree. So hopefully, outside of updating which recipe you
use to build the BSP, that's the only difference. As I mentioned, I
can provide you with the linux-yocto_5.2 recipes before I complete all
my system level testing on them, if not having the recipes is a
problem for using that branch.

I always move linux-yocto-dev forward as soon as I can, and those
jumps are rebases/non-fastforward.

That being said, I can keep the old branch in -dev around on 5.2
content, while the rest of the tree is v5.3. There just won't be the
branch prefixes to keep things straight. Since you are likely the only
developers using that -soc branch, it shouldn't be a problem.

Let me know what is easiest for you, since I do want to support your
development efforts.

Hi Bruce,

It would be best that the standard/xlnx-soc branch in linux-yocto-dev is kept

at 5.2 content. Then after I fix bugs and finishing porting to 5.3, I will send request

to re-create this branch.




the v5.3 port ASAP.





and don't delete it.




Limeng (1):
     driver: pcie: reset pcie device with MIO31 on xilinx-zcu102

Quanyang Wang (1):
     drm: xlnx: zynqmp_dp: initialize delayed work before enable

    .../boot/dts/xilinx/zynqmp-zcu102-revA.dts    |  1 +
    drivers/gpu/drm/xlnx/zynqmp_dp.c              |  3 +-
    drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c      | 35
    3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)


linux-yocto mailing list

Reply via email to