Re: ARM kernel config for Linux 3.11
On Sun, 2013-09-15 at 16:42 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> As discussed previously, I think PCI should be enabled for the
> armhf/armmp flavour as the Marvell Armada SoCs have PCIe interfaces. It
> might be worthwhile to restrict which PCI drivers are built, if this
> slows the build down a lot.
I've started preparing patches for this against trunk. As well as
turning on CONFIG_PCI I'm also looking at enabling some additional NIC
and SCSI cards and adding the standard nic-modules and scsi-modules to
the udebs.
My armhf system is pretty fast so I can't make a good judgement on
slowing the build down (however that should be mitigated by the removal
of other flavours?)
> Ian also proposed to add an armhf/armmp-lpae flavour. I think it's time
> to do that, but I would also like to see the 3 platform-specific armhf
> flavours removed. Which of the platforms are sufficiently well
> supported by armhf/armmp that we can do that?
I've got patches to remove mx5 and vexpress in my queue, I don't know
how/why I skipped omap, but I'll add it in.
I cannot answer the question of how well they are actually supported (so
I'd be reluctant to push them). I do have some i.MX53 (loco) boards at
the office but I'm away at the minute (they are technically "production"
but are mostly obsolete and I could nick one or two for testing).
> The new imx-drm driver (CONFIG_DRM_IMX) should probably be enabled in
> armhf/armmp and armhf/mx5.
That reminds me, kernel-wedge is currently complaining about missing
sdhci-esdhc-imx from the mx5 flavour. I think this is fallout from
disabling MMC_SDHCI_PLTFM in 3.11-1~exp1.
> After some cleanup of the top-level configuration, the armel/iop32x and
> armel/ixp4xx flavours can again be built. However these may still need
> specific attention in the future.
>
> Ben.
>
Reply to: