xtensa port maintenance
Hi.
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.
I have a goal to make xtensa arch in the linux mainline usable. Currently I have a number of patches on top of Linus' tree that allow to build working allnoconfig, defconfig and allmodconfig kernels for ISS machine with dc232b and fsf core variants [1]. For the next several weeks I'm planning to forward-port patches accumulated in linux-xtensa.org git trees and make the resulting kernels rock-solid. I'd like to restore xtensa participation in the linux-next. Further (currently undetailed) plans are to bring modern Linux features to the xtensa port, e.g. device trees.
I have a couple of questions regarding the path of xtensa-specific patches upstream:
- which git tree should they be targeted for? Should I set up a tree for pull requests, or will patches be picked up into some existing tree? (Looks like Linus' tree is the right target. AFAIK previously xtensa patches went mostly through akpm tree).
- which mailing lists should they go to?
(I guess that besides [email protected] list they should go to [email protected] for general review. Anything else?)
Should you wonder what I am:
I am a member of St.Petersburg Open Source and Linux Lab [2]. My previous contributions to Linux are related to p54spi wireless driver. I'm also a developer and maintainer of the target-xtensa QEMU port [3].
[1] https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa
[2] http://osll.spb.ru
[3] http://wiki.qemu.org/Features/Xtensa
Signature · 2 lines
Thanks. -- Max
Hi Max,
Quoted 3 lines · Max Filippov
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.
I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
The tree on linux-xtensa.org has quite diverted from mainline now. Pete has done a great job maintaining those kernel versions, fixing a lot of bugs, and adding a ton of new additional features, but it will take quite some effort to merge them with the latest kernel.
Quoted 1 line
I have a goal to make xtensa arch in the linux mainline usable.
Awesome!! Every help is very much appreciated.
Quoted 3 lines
Currently I have a number of patches on top of Linus' tree that allow to build working allnoconfig, defconfig and allmodconfig kernels for ISS machine with dc232b and fsf core variants [1]. For the next several weeks I'm planning to
You might expect that I'm more than curious to see those changes :-)
Quoted 4 lines
forward-port patches accumulated in linux-xtensa.org git trees and make the resulting kernels rock-solid. I'd like to restore xtensa participation in the linux-next. Further (currently undetailed) plans are to bring modern Linux features to the xtensa port, e.g. device trees.
That would be great. Might I also add that we'd need to have a working toolchain and bootable image. For me, buildroot seems to be the quickest route here. That would also require possibly adding patches to the toolchain and uClibc that are currently missing. There's also the bootloader, etc.
Quoted 6 lines
I have a couple of questions regarding the path of xtensa-specific patches upstream:
- which git tree should they be targeted for? Should I set up a tree for pull requests, or will patches be picked up into some existing tree? (Looks like Linus' tree is the right target. AFAIK previously xtensa patches went mostly through akpm tree).
Yes, Andrew has been very helpful stepping in and adding those patches. Most if not all of those patches were fixes because of generic kernel changes and not major fixes or changes to the core of the Xtensa port.
Ideally, it would be great if you could create a git tree (I saw you already have a version on github already?) that would allow us to look over those patches. The goal should be to have a system to build toolchain, bootable image, and kernel, so we can run some regression tests on either the simulator (qemu) or an actual board. Once we have a regression test system in place, we can then add more features and funnel those patches either through me or more directly..
What do you think?
If you already have such a system in place, it would be great if you could send me some instructions to recreate it locally. We can give you also access to the wiki to add any information there.
Quoted 3 lines
- which mailing lists should they go to?
(I guess that besides [email protected] list they should go to [email protected] for general review. Anything else?)
For now, I would really appreciate if you could hold off sending any major patch to the linux-kernel mailing list until we had a chance to look over them unless it's some generic patch (fixing an issue because of an API change to the kernel, etc.)
Andrew is currently adding all Xtensa patches sent to that list, and I would hate having to irritate him having to ask to remove or change patches, etc.
Quoted 4 lines
Should you wonder what I am:
I am a member of St.Petersburg Open Source and Linux Lab [2]. My previous contributions to Linux are related to p54spi wireless driver. I'm also a developer and maintainer of the target-xtensa QEMU port [3].
That's so great!! I didn't know there was a QEMU port for Xtensa.
Bottom line, I hope you agree with me that the kernel, although the most fun part, is only one piece of the puzzle, and we also need a running system. If you already have that in place, we can jump to the kernel fairly quickly.
Thanks,
-Chris
Hi Chris,
Quoted 6 lines · Chris Zankel
Quoted 4 lines · Max Filippov
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for
xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.
Quoted 6 lines
I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
Are the errors
| dangerous relocation: l32r: literal placed after use: .literal.unlikely
(http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/6845615/)
preventing linking of vmlinux toolchain issues?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Quoted 16 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Chris,
Quoted 6 lines · Chris Zankel
Quoted 4 lines · Max Filippov
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for
xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.Quoted 6 lines
I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
Quoted 6 lines
Are the errors
| dangerous relocation: l32r: literal placed after use: .literal.unlikely
(http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/6845615/)preventing linking of vmlinux toolchain issues?
They may be considered as such (toolchain now adds *.unlikely sections which was not the case previously), or may not, depending on what one would expect from the toolchain. I have a fix for that issue:
https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa/commit/edd7c14132388d5c09c57cf12c76c6631a1e0277
Signature · 2 lines
Thanks. -- Max
Hi Max,
Quoted 20 lines · Max Filippov
Quoted 19 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Quoted 6 lines · Chris Zankel
Quoted 4 lines · Max Filippov
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for
xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.Quoted 6 lines
I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
Are the errors
| dangerous relocation: l32r: literal placed after use: .literal.unlikely
(http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/6845615/)
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
preventing linking of vmlinux toolchain issues?
They may be considered as such (toolchain now adds *.unlikely sections which was not the case previously), or may not, depending on what one would expect from the toolchain. I have a fix for that issue:
https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa/commit/edd7c14132388d5c09c57cf12c76c6631a1e0277
Thanks, that indeed fixes the link issue for me!
BTW, how do you export a "commitdiff" from the github web interface?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Quoted 25 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Max,
Quoted 22 lines · Max Filippov
Quoted 20 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Quoted 6 lines · Chris Zankel
Quoted 4 lines · Max Filippov
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for
xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.Quoted 6 lines
I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
Are the errors
| dangerous relocation: l32r: literal placed after use: .literal.unlikely
(http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/6845615/)preventing linking of vmlinux toolchain issues?
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
They may be considered as such (toolchain now adds *.unlikely sections which was not the case previously), or may not, depending on what one would expect from the toolchain. I have a fix for that issue:
https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa/commit/edd7c14132388d5c09c57cf12c76c6631a1e0277Thanks, that indeed fixes the link issue for me!
BTW, how do you export a "commitdiff" from the github web interface?
Not sure what you mean... You can get raw commitdiff by adding '.patch' to the URL above:
https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa/commit/edd7c14132388d5c09c57cf12c76c6631a1e0277.patch
Signature · 2 lines
Thanks. -- Max
Hi Max,
Quoted 4 lines · Max Filippov
Quoted 3 lines · Geert Uytterhoeven
Quoted 1 line · Max Filippov
https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa/commit/edd7c14132388d5c09c57cf12c76c6631a1e0277
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Thanks, that indeed fixes the link issue for me!
BTW, how do you export a "commitdiff" from the github web interface?
Not sure what you mean... You can get raw commitdiff by adding '.patch' to the URL above:
https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa/commit/edd7c14132388d5c09c57cf12c76c6631a1e0277.patch
Thanks, that's what I was looking for, but couldn't find, so I had to apply it manually.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Quoted 9 lines · Chris Zankel
Hi Max,
Quoted 5 lines · Max Filippov
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for
xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.
Quoted 6 lines
I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
I've been using userspace built from the buildroot image hosted on linux-xtensa.org with gcc-4.4.5 + binutils-2.20.1. I use gcc-4.6.3 (without libc) + binutils-2.22 to build the kernel. I had an impression that mentioned buildroot was able to produce userspace where LTP could run successfully for days. So, my initial plan is to use that userspace with mainline kernel.
[...]
Quoted 34 lines
Quoted 6 lines
forward-port patches accumulated in linux-xtensa.org git trees and make the
resulting kernels rock-solid. I'd like to restore xtensa participation in the
linux-next. Further (currently undetailed) plans are to bring modern Linux features to the xtensa port, e.g. device trees.That would be great. Might I also add that we'd need to have a working toolchain and bootable image. For me, buildroot seems to be the quickest route here. That would also require possibly adding patches to the toolchain and uClibc that are currently missing. There's also the bootloader, etc.
Quoted 9 lines
I have a couple of questions regarding the path of xtensa-specific patches upstream:
- which git tree should they be targeted for? Should I set up a tree
for
pull requests, or will patches be picked up into some existing
tree?
(Looks like Linus' tree is the right target. AFAIK previously
xtensa
patches went mostly through akpm tree).Yes, Andrew has been very helpful stepping in and adding those patches. Most if not all of those patches were fixes because of generic kernel changes and not major fixes or changes to the core of the Xtensa port.
Ideally, it would be great if you could create a git tree (I saw you already have a version on github already?) that would allow us to look over those patches. The goal should be to have a system to build toolchain, bootable image, and kernel, so we can run some regression tests on either the simulator (qemu) or an actual board. Once we have a regression test system in place, we can then add more features and funnel those patches either through me or more directly..
Quoted 1 line
What do you think?
I have a subset thereof that builds toolchain (without libc) and the kernel. Buildroot gave me an impression of not very reproducible environment, perhaps I spent too little time on it. So I made an image and I hope that pre-built image
may be used, at least in the beginning. I had to lightly patch U-boot hosted on linux-xtensa.org to make it work on LX60/110/200 QEMU models. I guess we can start with pre-built image of the bootloader too.
Quoted 3 lines
If you already have such a system in place, it would be great if you could send me some instructions to recreate it locally. We can give you also access to the wiki to add any information there.
Ok, I'll consolidate my scripts to something that could be used as such system and share them. I have an editor access to wiki.linux-xtensa.org.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 4 lines
- which mailing lists should they go to?
(I guess that besides [email protected] list they
should go
to [email protected] for general review. Anything else?)For now, I would really appreciate if you could hold off sending any major patch to the linux-kernel mailing list until we had a chance to look over them unless it's some generic patch (fixing an issue because of an API change to the kernel, etc.)
Ok. I'd like to have even generic patches (my current queue is mostly generic) reviewed. Do you prefer to read them on github or on the linux-xtensa mailing list?
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 1 line
I'm also a developer and maintainer of the target-xtensa QEMU port [3].
That's so great!! I didn't know there was a QEMU port for Xtensa.
It's there since qemu-1.0.
Quoted 3 lines
Bottom line, I hope you agree with me that the kernel, although the most fun part, is only one piece of the puzzle, and we also need a running system. If you already have that in place, we can jump to the kernel fairly quickly.
Completely agree.
Signature · 2 lines
Thanks. -- Max
Hi Max,
Quoted 14 lines · Max Filippov
Quoted 7 lines · Chris Zankel
Hi Max,
Quoted 4 lines · Max Filippov
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for
xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org.Quoted 6 lines
I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
Quoted 6 lines
I've been using userspace built from the buildroot image hosted on linux-xtensa.org with gcc-4.4.5 + binutils-2.20.1. I use gcc-4.6.3 (without libc) + binutils-2.22 to build the kernel. I had an impression that mentioned buildroot was able to produce userspace where LTP could run successfully for days. So, my initial plan is to use that userspace with mainline kernel.
Good plan!
Quoted 7 lines
I have a subset thereof that builds toolchain (without libc) and the kernel. Buildroot gave me an impression of not very reproducible environment, perhaps I spent too little time on it. So I made an image and I hope that pre-built image
may be used, at least in the beginning. I had to lightly patch U-boot hosted on linux-xtensa.org to make it work on LX60/110/200 QEMU models. I guess we can start with pre-built image of the bootloader too.
I'm not settled on Buildroot, but I had the best experience with it so far. OpenEmbedded was a real pain when I used it (it might have improved a lot since, though). I once even started my own build system, but it became fairly complicated once I wanted to build a bootable system with a C library and various packages.
Quoted 1 line
Ok. I'd like to have even generic patches (my current queue is mostly generic) reviewed. Do you prefer to read them on github or on the linux-xtensa mailing list?
I looked over them briefly, and only had one or two questions. I'll send them tomorrow (our time).
Thanks,
-Chris
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): CAJH6qSc=Xffk85To2wZ=Ynw41Wb385XEpcT_OGjPV7r=i7M+UQ@mail.gmail.com
Hi Vadim,
Quoted 7 lines · Vadim Malenboim
Hi All,
I've beed dealing with the xtensa port for couple of months and I'd like to contribute / help as much as possible.
I have an ML605 Xilinx Evaluation Board and already succeeded running the clean-stable version from xtensa-linux on it.
I propose doing the testing on this board and any other tasks / issues you think I can help, I'd be glad to.
Excellent!! I'm looking forward to your help.
-Chris
Quoted 147 lines
Vadim.
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Chris Zankel <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Max,
On 08/06/2012 04:38 PM, Max Filippov wrote:
AFAIK xtensa linux port is currently in bad shape: it doesn't work in the
mainline, it fails to build in the linux-next. The latest working kernels for
xtensa are 2.6.29...31 trees hosted at the git.linux-xtensa.org <http://git.linux-xtensa.org>.I wouldn't say it's in bad shape, I just built an vmlinux image from the latest tree (3.6.0-rc1), but it might not be very stable. One of the major issues is not really the kernel but there's actually no way to build a fairly recent version of the toolchain. I have been using a somewhat more recent buildroot version than what is on xtensa-linux.org <http://xtensa-linux.org>, but even that version of buildroot is rather old now and needed a few patches.
The tree on linux-xtensa.org <http://linux-xtensa.org> has quite diverted from mainline now. Pete has done a great job maintaining those kernel versions, fixing a lot of bugs, and adding a ton of new additional features, but it will take quite some effort to merge them with the latest kernel.
I have a goal to make xtensa arch in the linux mainline usable.
Awesome!! Every help is very much appreciated.
Currently I have a number of patches on top of Linus' tree that allow to build
working allnoconfig, defconfig and allmodconfig kernels for ISS machine with
dc232b and fsf core variants [1]. For the next several weeks I'm planning toYou might expect that I'm more than curious to see those changes :-)
forward-port patches accumulated in linux-xtensa.org
<http://linux-xtensa.org> git trees and make the resulting kernels rock-solid. I'd like to restore xtensa participation in the
linux-next. Further (currently undetailed) plans are to bring modern Linux
features to the xtensa port, e.g. device trees.That would be great. Might I also add that we'd need to have a working toolchain and bootable image. For me, buildroot seems to be the quickest route here. That would also require possibly adding patches to the toolchain and uClibc that are currently missing. There's also the bootloader, etc.
I have a couple of questions regarding the path of xtensa-specific patches
upstream:
- which git tree should they be targeted for? Should I
set up a tree for
pull requests, or will patches be picked up into some
existing tree?
(Looks like Linus' tree is the right target. AFAIK
previously xtensa
patches went mostly through akpm tree).Yes, Andrew has been very helpful stepping in and adding those patches. Most if not all of those patches were fixes because of generic kernel changes and not major fixes or changes to the core of the Xtensa port.
Ideally, it would be great if you could create a git tree (I saw you already have a version on github already?) that would allow us to look over those patches. The goal should be to have a system to build toolchain, bootable image, and kernel, so we can run some regression tests on either the simulator (qemu) or an actual board. Once we have a regression test system in place, we can then add more features and funnel those patches either through me or more directly..
What do you think?
If you already have such a system in place, it would be great if you could send me some instructions to recreate it locally. We can give you also access to the wiki to add any information there.
- which mailing lists should they go to? (I guess that besides [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> list they should go
to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> for general review. Anything else?)For now, I would really appreciate if you could hold off sending any major patch to the linux-kernel mailing list until we had a chance to look over them unless it's some generic patch (fixing an issue because of an API change to the kernel, etc.)
Andrew is currently adding all Xtensa patches sent to that list, and I would hate having to irritate him having to ask to remove or change patches, etc.
Should you wonder what I am:
I am a member of St.Petersburg Open Source and Linux Lab [2]. My previous contributions to Linux are related to p54spi wireless driver.
I'm also a developer and maintainer of the target-xtensa QEMU port [3].That's so great!! I didn't know there was a QEMU port for Xtensa.
Bottom line, I hope you agree with me that the kernel, although the most fun part, is only one piece of the puzzle, and we also need a running system. If you already have that in place, we can jump to the kernel fairly quickly.
Thanks,
-Chris_______________________________________________
linux-xtensa mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.linux-xtensa.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-xtensaSignature · 6 lines
*Vadim Malenboim.* Low Level Software Engineer. Cellular : +972(544)925862 E-Mail : [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> WEB : www.tangotec.com <http://www.tangotec.com>
Quoted 6 lines · Max Filippov
I have a couple of questions regarding the path of xtensa-specific patches upstream:
- which git tree should they be targeted for? Should I set up a tree for pull requests, or will patches be picked up into some existing tree? (Looks like Linus' tree is the right target. AFAIK previously xtensa patches went mostly through akpm tree).
Setting up a git tree is a good first step if you want to be the official maintainer, and if you want to get it included into linux-next.
You should also update the maintainers file to list your git tree and name, and have Chris give you an official approval for that update. My impression is that he is still occasionally doing work on upstream maintainance but has moved on to other priorities now. The two of you should decide together if you want to both be listed as maintainers or one of you should be a primary contact and the other one doing work in the background.
Quoted 3 lines
- which mailing lists should they go to?
(I guess that besides [email protected] list they should go to [email protected] for general review. Anything else?)
There is also linux-arch, which has the architecture maintainers. You can consult that list if you have specific questions about changes that are going on across architectures.
What kind of changes to you expect to do to the architecture port? Are there additional platforms you want to get supported? Do you want to stay compatible with existing user space software, or are you thinking about moving to the new generic system call interfaces that would require rebuilding all user land binaries?
Arnd
Hi Arnd,
Given the recent renewed push for Xtensa, I'll step in to feed the changes upstream. We might change that in future, though.
Max has volunteered to help bring the Xtensa port up-to-date. Most of the recent development was done on outdated trees and never got submitted in true kernel-manner (i.e. small changes at a time). It's also important to bring the ecosystem (compilers, libraries, etc.) to the latest trees, and my understanding is that there's also work going on in that area.
I have set up a tree on github for now, and will work close with Max to get his changes to Stephen's linux-next tree and eventually Linus' tree. I think it's fine to add Max as a second maintainer, so he can help filtering patches.
Cheers!
-Chris
Quoted 10 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 6 lines · Max Filippov
I have a couple of questions regarding the path of xtensa-specific patches upstream:
- which git tree should they be targeted for? Should I set up a tree for pull requests, or will patches be picked up into some existing tree? (Looks like Linus' tree is the right target. AFAIK previously xtensa patches went mostly through akpm tree).Setting up a git tree is a good first step if you want to be the official maintainer, and if you want to get it included into linux-next.
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Quoted 4 lines · Chris Zankel
I have set up a tree on github for now, and will work close with Max to get his changes to Stephen's linux-next tree and eventually Linus' tree.
I think it's fine to add Max as a second maintainer [...]
Thanks for helping!
Quoted 1 line · Pete Delaney
I'm afraid that doing it piecemeal has failed in the past
Proper patches work fine, was just never done.
(Can discuss off this To: list.)
Quoted 1 line
Mind anding Marc and myself?
Acting as maintainer involves submitting useful patches over some period of time. Right now that's Max and Chris. (Love to do it, but have plenty as it is on my plate.)
Thanks,
-Marc
Hi Marc,
Is Skype library available for Xtensa Linux port?
They are available for ARM.
Thanks.
-Rakesh
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Gauthier [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 9:47 PM
To: Pete Delaney; Chris Zankel; Arnd Bergmann; [email protected]; Kirill Krinkin; Stephen Rothwell; Greg KH; [email protected]; Max Filippov; [email protected]; Andrew Morton; Linus Torvalds; 'Mahavir Prasad'; Prasanna Rao; Shimon Edelhaus; Rakesh Jain
Subject: Re: xtensa port maintenance
Quoted 4 lines · Chris Zankel
I have set up a tree on github for now, and will work close with Max to get his changes to Stephen's linux-next tree and eventually Linus' tree.
I think it's fine to add Max as a second maintainer [...]
Thanks for helping!
Quoted 1 line · Pete Delaney
I'm afraid that doing it piecemeal has failed in the past
Proper patches work fine, was just never done.
(Can discuss off this To: list.)
Quoted 1 line
Mind anding Marc and myself?
Acting as maintainer involves submitting useful patches over some period of time. Right now that's Max and Chris. (Love to do it, but have plenty as it is on my plate.)
Thanks,
-Marc
Quoted 3 lines · Rakesh Jain
Hi Marc,
Is Skype library available for Xtensa Linux port?
They are available for ARM.
I'd also like to know more about the Skype library.
-piet
Quoted 30 lines
Thanks.
-Rakesh-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Gauthier [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 9:47 PM
To: Pete Delaney; Chris Zankel; Arnd Bergmann; [email protected]; Kirill Krinkin; Stephen Rothwell; Greg KH; [email protected]; Max Filippov; [email protected]; Andrew Morton; Linus Torvalds; 'Mahavir Prasad'; Prasanna Rao; Shimon Edelhaus; Rakesh Jain
Subject: Re: xtensa port maintenanceQuoted 4 lines · Chris Zankel
I have set up a tree on github for now, and will work close with Max to get his changes to Stephen's linux-next tree and eventually Linus' tree.
I think it's fine to add Max as a second maintainer [...]Thanks for helping!
Quoted 1 line · Pete Delaney
I'm afraid that doing it piecemeal has failed in the past
Proper patches work fine, was just never done.
(Can discuss off this To: list.)Quoted 1 line
Mind anding Marc and myself?
Acting as maintainer involves submitting useful patches over some period of time. Right now that's Max and Chris. (Love to do it, but have plenty as it is on my plate.)
Thanks,
-Marc
Hi Piet and Marc,
Skype does not provide source code for their app.
Skype provides libraries for embedded Linux platforms for ARM architecture such as TV widgets.
If my customer wants to provide Skype application for Xtensa platform, is there way to get Skype library for xtensa? -Rakesh
-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Delaney [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 10:35 PM
To: Rakesh Jain
Cc: Marc Gauthier; Chris Zankel; Arnd Bergmann; [email protected]; Kirill Krinkin; Stephen Rothwell; Greg KH; [email protected]; Max Filippov; [email protected]; Andrew Morton; Linus Torvalds; 'Mahavir Prasad'; Prasanna Rao; Shimon Edelhaus
Subject: Re: xtensa port maintenance
Quoted 3 lines · Rakesh Jain
Hi Marc,
Is Skype library available for Xtensa Linux port?
They are available for ARM.
I'd also like to know more about the Skype library.
-piet
Quoted 34 lines
Thanks.
-Rakesh-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Gauthier [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 9:47 PM
To: Pete Delaney; Chris Zankel; Arnd Bergmann; [email protected]; Kirill Krinkin; Stephen Rothwell; Greg KH; [email protected]; Max Filippov; [email protected]; Andrew Morton; Linus Torvalds; 'Mahavir Prasad'; Prasanna Rao; Shimon Edelhaus; Rakesh Jain
Subject: Re: xtensa port maintenanceQuoted 4 lines · Chris Zankel
I have set up a tree on github for now, and will work close with Max to get his changes to Stephen's linux-next tree and eventually Linus' tree.
I think it's fine to add Max as a second maintainer [...]Thanks for helping!
Quoted 1 line · Pete Delaney
I'm afraid that doing it piecemeal has failed in the past
Proper patches work fine, was just never done.
(Can discuss off this To: list.)Quoted 1 line
Mind anding Marc and myself?
Acting as maintainer involves submitting useful patches over some period of time. Right now that's Max and Chris. (Love to do it, but have plenty as it is on my plate.)
Thanks,
-Marc