On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 17:31 +0800, Yunqiang Su wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > [...] >> >> diff -Nru linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mips64/defines linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mips64/defines >> >> --- linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mips64/defines 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 >> >> +++ linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mips64/defines 2014-05-29 00:26:03.000000000 +0000 >> >> @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@ >> >> +[base] >> >> +flavours: >> >> + r4k-ip22 >> >> + r5k-ip32 >> >> + sb1-bcm91250a >> >> + 5kc-malta >> >> + octeon >> > >> > I don't think we should build such a large number of flavours for a new >> > architecture. Most of those machines are obsolete by now. >> >> Which one do you think to be kept? >> sb1-bcm91250a and octeon ? > > That seems sensible - those would cover all of Debian's own MIPS > hardware that can run big-endian. For mips64(eb), only these 2 flavors are kept. > > [...] >> >> diff -Nru linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mipsel/defines linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mipsel/defines >> >> --- linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mipsel/defines 2014-05-06 09:37:03.000000000 +0000 >> >> +++ linux-3.15~rc7/debian/config/mipsel/defines 2014-05-29 00:27:04.000000000 +0000 >> > >> > This patch does a little more than the subject says! >> > >> >> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ >> >> loongson-2e >> >> loongson-2f >> >> loongson-3 >> >> + octeon >> > >> > Is it useful to run Octeon on little-endian mode? >> >> I have not very clear for mipsel while we have mips64el only now. >> Maybe we should keep octeon in mips64el while not in mipsel > > OK. > >> > [...] >> >> diff -Nru linux-3.15~rc7/debian/installer/mips64/modules/mips64/btrfs-modules linux-3.15~rc7/debian/installer/mips64/modules/mips64/btrfs-modules >> >> --- linux-3.15~rc7/debian/installer/mips64/modules/mips64/btrfs-modules 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 >> >> +++ linux-3.15~rc7/debian/installer/mips64/modules/mips64/btrfs-modules 2014-05-29 02:20:50.000000000 +0000 >> >> @@ -0,0 +1 @@ >> >> +#include <btrfs-modules> >> > [...] >> > >> > All the installer modules configuration files should be copied *by >> > reference* from mips or mipsel, either using a relative #include or a >> > directory symlink. >> > >> >> OK, I will link them, while diff (debdiff) treats them as normal file. > > That's true, but if you check out the source using svn or git-svn you > can make a diff that shows symlinks. > > git-svn would be best, as you could then split your changes up into > multiple patches: > > 1. Move common MIPS kernel config files to kernelarch-mips > 2. Add kernel config files for mips64/mips64el > 3. Add installer config files to mips64/mips64el > >> the dsc file is here: >> http://mips.wicp.net:9998/mips2/temp/ > > Looking at the new patch: > >> --- linux-3.15~rc8/debian/config/defines 2014-05-14 15:41:05.000000000 +0000 >> +++ linux-3.15~rc8/debian/config/defines 2014-06-05 06:23:54.000000000 +0000 >> @@ -14,6 +14,8 @@ >> m68k >> mips >> mipsel >> + mips64 >> + mips64el >> or1k >> powerpc >> powerpcspe >> @@ -25,7 +27,7 @@ >> sparc >> sparc64 >> x32 >> -compiler: gcc-4.8 >> +compiler: gcc-4.9 >> featuresets: >> none >> rt > > This is the default setting for all architectures; you must not change > it but instead override it in debian/config/mips64/defines and > debian/config/mips64el/defines. > > [...] >> diff -Nru linux-3.15~rc8/debian/config/mips/defines linux-3.15~rc8/debian/config/mips/defines >> --- linux-3.15~rc8/debian/config/mips/defines 2014-05-06 09:37:03.000000000 +0000 >> +++ linux-3.15~rc8/debian/config/mips/defines 2014-06-05 05:43:07.000000000 +0000 >> @@ -12,29 +12,47 @@ >> image-file: vmlinux >> >> [image] >> -initramfs: false >> +initramfs: true >> install-stem: vmlinux >> >> [r4k-ip22_description] > > I don't think you can simply change this, as some of the boot loaders > used on old MIPS systems don't support an initramfs. If it was that > simple, we would have done it already! > I changed them back now. > [...] >> --- linux-3.15~rc8/debian/installer/mips64el/package-list 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 >> +++ linux-3.15~rc8/debian/installer/mips64el/package-list 2014-06-05 05:59:58.000000000 +0000 >> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ >> +# This file is used to build up the control file. The kernel version and >> +# "-di" are appended to the package names. Section can be left out. So can >> +# architecture, which is derived from the files in the modules directory. >> +# It overwrites specifications from /usr/share/kernel-wedge/package-list. >> +# >> +Package: kernel-image >> +Provides_sb1-bcm91250a: ata-modules, ext2-modules, ext3-modules, ext4-modules, rtc-modules >> +Provides_5kc-malta: ata-modules, ext2-modules, ext3-modules, ext4-modules, rtc-modules >> +Provides_loongson-2e: ata-modules, ext2-modules, ext3-modules, ext4-modules, rtc-modules >> +Provides_loongson-2f: ata-modules, ext2-modules, ext3-modules, ext4-modules, rtc-modules >> +Provides_loongson-3: ata-modules, ext2-modules, ext3-modules, ext4-modules, rtc-modules > [...] > > As all the kernel flavours have the same things built-in, you can write > a single 'Provides:' line instead. OK. > > *But* the mips64/mips64el kernels will always boot with an initramfs, so > the ATA drivers and ext4 can be built as modules. I think the > configuration overrides that make them built-in on mips/mipsel should be > kept there and not moved into the common configuration in > kernelarch-mips. You could do that as a later cleanup patch, though. > For now, I think that keeping all mips/mipsel/mips64/mips64el same is better. so, I didn't change this. > Ben. > > -- > Ben Hutchings > You can't have everything. Where would you put it? -- Yunqiang Su
Attachment:
0001-Move-common-MIPS-kernel-config-files-to-kernelarch-m.patch
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
0002-Add-kernel-config-files-for-mips64-mips64el.patch
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
0003-Clean-up-mipsel-installer.patch
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
0004-Add-installer-config-files-to-mips64-mips64el.patch
Description: Binary data