[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ARM: OMAP2+ flavour

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 06:17:59PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Sebastian Reichel <elektranox@gmail.com> [2010-11-23 09:42]:
> > The config does not disable the support for other OMAP devices. It
> > should support most of the OMAP devices available (but they
> > probably need some more drivers). The only limitation is, that
> > it must use an OMAP2 processor or later (you have to select in the
> It's possible to build support for OMAP 2, 3 and 4 into one kernel
> image.

Yes, that the reason why I named the config -omap and not -n900 or
-omap3 :) The configuration, which I linked to [0], does not touch
the board configuration - they are all enabled by default :)

> I think OMAP would be a reasonable addition to the Debian kernel
> since there are a lot of devices.

Yes, there are lot's of smartphones today and there will come more,
because omap4 is also supported by the kernel :)

> However, personally I'd like to see explicit support for some OMAP
> devices in Debian installer, otherwise I don't see a lot of value
> in providing a kernel. (Those who don't need d-i can probably also
> compile their own kernel or take a kernel image from an external
> web site).

I do not know much about d-i internals, but there was a Google
Summer of Code project this year, which was supposed to add Openmoko
Freerunner support to d-i. So it should be that much work to add
Nokia N900 support? Apart from this it should be easy to add support
for the Beagleboard or Pandaboard, since they very similar to a
normal PC, but I don't own them ;)

The OMAP kernel configuration I provided is not that useful on the
N900 without the touchscreen driver though. Would it be acceptable
to add the tsc2005 driver as patch until it hits mainline [1]?

[0] http://files.ring0.de/sre/n900-debian-kernel/src/config.omap
[1] http://ns3.spinics.net/lists/linux-input/msg12558.html

-- Sebastian

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: