martin mangard wrote:
> I made a patch in order to support the Atmel AT91SAM9G20 processor,
> which has to be applied after the "adeos-ipipe-2.6.27-arm-*" patch.
> Due to the similarities between the AT91SAM9260 and the AT91SAM9G20
> processor, only a few changes were necessary. I booted the system on a
> "AT91SAM9G20-EK" development
> board and executed "latencytest" and "clocktest". Are there plans to
> officially support this processor in the future?
Well, now that you sent the patch, this should be included in the next
adeos patch. However:
- your mailer mangled the patch, so I can not apply it, please configure
your mailer to avoid mangling the patch, or if that is not possible,
send the patch as attachment;
- there is one change in your patch that I do not like:
> #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91SAM9260
> #define cpu_is_at91sam9xe() (at91_arch_identify() ==
> -#define cpu_is_at91sam9260() ((at91_cpu_identify() ==
> ARCH_ID_AT91SAM9260) || cpu_is_at91sam9xe())
> +#define cpu_is_at91sam9260() ((at91_cpu_identify() ==
> ARCH_ID_AT91SAM9260) || cpu_is_at91sam9xe() ||
You are touching mailine code here. It this patch is really needed by
mainline, then post it to the linux arm kernel mailing list.
Xenomai-core mailing list