Hi Fabio,

On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 6:11 AM Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I suggest you to move to kernel 5.4.x instead.
>
>
Can you explain why you recommend the 5.4 kernel?  I don't see a recipe for
it in meta-freescale.

Can anyone else answer some of my other questions?

1. For i.MX6UL support and functionality, is there a significant difference
between linux-fslc and linux-imx-fslc?
2. For linux-imx-fslc, is there a specific reason it is still using
4.9-1.0.x-imx and not the newer 4.9-2.3.x-imx branch?
3. Is anyone maintaining the 4.9 branch and planning to keep it up to date
with upstream LTS updates?

Thanks,
Jesse

On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 6:11 AM Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jesse,
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 7:33 PM Jesse Gilles <jesse.gilles@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am working on a project using the i.MX6UL and I am curious about the
> state of Linux kernel support in various different kernel recipes in
> meta-freescale.
> >
> > After reading documentation and various posts, this is my understanding
> of the different kernels in the layer:
> >
> > linux-fslc: purely community maintained kernel, kept pretty up to date
> with upstream
> > linux-imx-fslc: community maintained kernel, based off NXP official BSP
> release kernel
> > linux-imx: NXP official BSP release kernel
> >
> > For i.MX6UL support and functionality, is there a significant difference
> between linux-fslc and linux-imx-fslc?
> >
> > For linux-imx-fslc, is there a specific reason it is still using
> 4.9-1.0.x-imx and not the newer 4.9-2.3.x-imx branch?
> >
> > If linux-imx-fslc is the best option, is anyone maintaining the 4.9
> branch and planning to keep it up to date with upstream LTS updates?  I see
> that 4.9-2.3.x-imx has been updated to 4.9.166.
> >
> > In short, I am looking for the best maintained and updated kernel with
> support for the i.MX6UL, including security fixes into the future.  My
> existing project uses a customized linux-imx 4.9 kernel.
> >
> > Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> I suggest you to move to kernel 5.4.x instead.
>
> Regards,
>
> Fabio Estevam
>