Hi,
Sorry for the formatting.
On 20 Oct 2017 19:06, "Stefano Stabellini" <sstabell...@kernel.org> wrote:
CC'ing Julien
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] linux-arm-xen branch, commit
access, etc."):
> > On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > 3. Use upstream released kernels. Follow them when they are released.
> >
> > I agree with Konrad. The reason why that branch is there is that
> > initially we needed a couple of patches to run Linux on Exynos5 boards
> > (Arndale). Today, vanilla releases should work. For example, 4.13 has
> > everything we need as far as I can tell. I think it is time to remove
> > the special branch.
>
> So vanilla kernels are going to work well on our new ARM64 boxes, eg
> ThunderX, and whatever we come up with for new ARM32 testing too ?
I think so: ThunderX and other server platforms should be more
"standard" than small embedded boards. But if we decide to buy some
small and cheap ARM32 boards, such as Linaro HiKey, they tend to still
require special kernel trees.
It is what you wish :). For instance Thunder-X support has been fully made
upstream (ACPI + DT) only recently.
In other words: I think we should be able to get rid of the special tree
for the hardware that we have today, but I cannot guarantee that we
won't ever need it in the future.
IIRC we are going to get some renesas board recently. Do you know if
upstream will work?
Julien, do you think we need to keep a special linux tree around for Xen
on ARM testing in OSSTest or we can start using vanilla kernel releases?
I would love to get rid of it, if you know of any reasons why we have to
keep it, this is the time to speak :-)
I think it would be better to keep aroundSome platform may be available
before the code is merged.
Cheers,
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
