From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D20DAEB64DC for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52566409EB; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 52566409EB X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ofFc12IUn0gP; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D17409E2; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 13D17409E2 Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B14141BF3F2 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F48409E2 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 95F48409E2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pMVKnd_Zs6YH for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 3BD47409C0 Received: from relay7-d.mail.gandi.net (relay7-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.200]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BD47409C0 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:40 +0000 (UTC) X-GND-Sasl: peter@korsgaard.com X-GND-Sasl: peter@korsgaard.com X-GND-Sasl: peter@korsgaard.com X-GND-Sasl: peter@korsgaard.com X-GND-Sasl: peter@korsgaard.com X-GND-Sasl: peter@korsgaard.com Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D309520004; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 15:22:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from peko by dell.be.48ers.dk with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qDRZT-006svl-Ra; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 17:22:35 +0200 From: Peter Korsgaard To: Arnout Vandecappelle References: <20230622160212.2063472-1-dannenberg@ti.com> <20230622160212.2063472-7-dannenberg@ti.com> <20230625135435.GC589277@scaer> Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2023 17:22:35 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Arnout Vandecappelle's message of "Sun, 25 Jun 2023 16:33:04 +0200") Message-ID: <875y7bpnwk.fsf@48ers.dk> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v9 06/11] board/ti/am62x_sk|am64x_sk: switch to TI SDK v8.6 sources X-BeenThere: buildroot@buildroot.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion and development of buildroot List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Romain Naour , buildroot@buildroot.org, "Yann E. MORIN" , Thomas Petazzoni , Andreas Dannenberg Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: buildroot-bounces@buildroot.org Sender: "buildroot" >>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle writes: Hi, >>> * TI Linux Kernel v5.10 >> So this means going from a 6.3 kernel back to a 5.10 (the current >> latest >> if 6.3, which is what is used in the defconfigs from the two previous >> patches). That's a bit unfortunate. >> Do you have plans to update to a more recent kernel in the (near) >> future? Can't we keep using 6.3 anyway? > We don't actually have a clear policy on whether to use upstream or > vendor kernels for the defconfigs. We have a few boards with both, > but IMHO that's not a great approach either. > Personally, I think it makes sense to focus on vendor kernels for the > defconfigs. Using upstream is generally easy, you just have to find > the appropriate device tree. But for the vendor kernel, you have to > find the repository, which branch is "current", and often also make > sure you sync up with U-Boot and OP-TEE etc. versions. @Andreas don't > take this as law, though, it's just personal opinion. Correct, but given the poor quality of most vendor kernels, using a board with mainline is typically a lot nicer (if the IP blocks you care about are supported naturally). Same about the support, E.G. we had issues with various vendor kernels/bootloaders breaking with newer toolchain versions. > That said, I think for each board we should look at what the vendor > kernel really brings. If everything, including GPU, is working with > the upstream kernel, it doesn't make sense to use the vendor kernel. I > don't know if that's the case in this specific situation. > Yann, Peter, Romain, Thomas, what do you think? Agreed. I would in general say go for mainline, unless there is no decent support in mainline. I would not necessarily think that GPU support is a requirement, but at least the things used by the defconfig (E.G. storage, serial, network). -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot@buildroot.org https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot