Re: Debian ARM architectures and subarchitectures
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 07:26:41PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
> 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.
*-mx50 & *-mx53
-- Héctor Orón