Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> 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.
Also, please send it as a patch to the current kernel i.e. 2.6.29.
Xenomai-core mailing list