Re: Debian ARM architectures and subarchitectures
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011, Hector Oron wrote:
> Uwe has pointed my to this patch:
> < http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/113099 >
See the rest of the thread too :-)
Would the kernel team be actually ok with building both a -mx51 *and* a
-mx53 in the future? I suspect it would be too heavy. In theory
CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT should work; it might be broken, but it's
clearly the way forward.
Anticipating support for mx53, I would recommend you go for -mx5; I'd
hope there is sufficient benefits in having a single kernel image that
even if this might be broken right now, it would be better to fix it
rather than go for two kernels just because of this single issue.
> It suggests to use two different subarchitectures for mx51 and mx503.