Hi Jim,

Just want to follow up on this. If anything for us to work on, let me know.

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 9:21 PM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

looking briefly at this patchset, there are some minor adjustments that need to happen. I'll see about working them up at some point today or tomorrow. Next week when I write up the kernel contribution documentation, most of the idiosyncrasies of packaging patches vs kernel patches should be a bit more clear.

On 11/17/2015 04:13 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

Hi Jim and all,

This is Phong Vo from AppliedMicro. Attached please find an additional set of patches we would like to be included in the next CentOS 7.1 (kernel 3.19) build.

0001-PCI-xgene-Add-support-for-a-64-bit-prefetchable-memo.patch 0002-pci-xgene-hide-X-Gene-BAR0-1-in-case-of-xgene_raw_pc.patch 0003-mailbox-Add-APM-Xgene-platform-mailbox-driver.patch 0004-drivers-i2c-add-X-Gene-SlimPro-I2C-driver.patch 0005-drivers-net-xgene-Add-TSO-support-RGMII-Delay-and-RG.patch 0006-arm64-copy_to-from-in_user-optimization-using-copy-t.patch

0007-config-add-config-centos-sig.patch Per Jim's suggestion, we propose to add a new config-centos-sig

config

file to enable/overwrite existing config's without changing the base kernel files stock.

Let me know if there is any questions or feedback.

Thanks,

-Phong

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

Hi Jim,

The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying SOURCES/Makefile.config. Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64, not the sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should be the same.

The 4.2 version is also ready and I'll submit as soon as I am done testing and the community space is ready. But the 3.19 version is still beneficial.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

I was able to adapt all but the config patch you sent. Are you able to update that patch to create a file called config-centos with your required settings? The format should be similar to ->

https://git.centos.org/blob/rpms!kernel-aarch64/910dbce5f13419d68002f58e67ee...

Probably also worth noting that this kernel will likely not live long, as the code for 7.2 was recently released and I'm working on building the updates. The kernel will be updated to a 4.2 based iteration which you can find here. https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!kernel-aarch64

I'll be creating the community space for it shortly so that we can accept patches against this version.

On 11/22/2015 07:14 PM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Just want to follow up on this. If anything for us to work on, let me know.

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 9:21 PM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

looking briefly at this patchset, there are some minor adjustments that need to happen. I'll see about working them up at some point today or tomorrow. Next week when I write up the kernel contribution documentation, most of the idiosyncrasies of packaging patches vs kernel patches should be a bit more clear.

On 11/17/2015 04:13 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim and all,

This is Phong Vo from AppliedMicro. Attached please find an additional set of patches we would like to be included in the next CentOS 7.1 (kernel 3.19) build.

0001-PCI-xgene-Add-support-for-a-64-bit-prefetchable-memo.patch 0002-pci-xgene-hide-X-Gene-BAR0-1-in-case-of-xgene_raw_pc.patch 0003-mailbox-Add-APM-Xgene-platform-mailbox-driver.patch 0004-drivers-i2c-add-X-Gene-SlimPro-I2C-driver.patch 0005-drivers-net-xgene-Add-TSO-support-RGMII-Delay-and-RG.patch 0006-arm64-copy_to-from-in_user-optimization-using-copy-t.patch

0007-config-add-config-centos-sig.patch Per Jim's suggestion, we propose to add a new config-centos-sig

config

...

file to enable/overwrite existing config's without changing the base kernel files stock.

Let me know if there is any questions or feedback.

Thanks,

-Phong

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

Hi Jim,

I am resending the config patch. The change is to use merge.pl to merge config-centos-sig into the final config in SPECS/kernel-aarch64 instead of modifying Makefile.config.

The patch is against branch 3.19 of git://git.centos.org/sig-altarch/kernel.git

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,

-Phong

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

On 11/23/2015 09:42 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying SOURCES/Makefile.config. Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64, not the sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should be the same.

Right. It's this modification of the Makefile.config I'm trying to avoid. The way the configs are combined in the spec file mean that we don't need to modify it. It's a semantic difference in how the packaging is done, where I'm trying to reduce or eliminate the need to modify/touch files provided by rh or in the kernel tarball.

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

I've been reasonably head-down on getting the new sources built.

I guess my concern here is the need to merge your config changes in each iteration. Is there a particular reason for doing it that way? Are you trying to ensure ordering here?

Also, we'll have the updated builds ready to go in the next few days. I can run with this for the 3.19 update for now, however we'd need the 4.2 patches reasonably soon. Would that be a problem?

On 12/02/2015 03:44 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

Hi Jim,

Do you have any feedback?

-Phong

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Phong Vo pvo@apm.com wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

I am resending the config patch. The change is to use merge.pl to merge config-centos-sig into the final config in SPECS/kernel-aarch64 instead of modifying Makefile.config.

The patch is against branch 3.19 of git://git.centos.org/sig-altarch/kernel.git

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,

-Phong

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

...

On 11/23/2015 09:42 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying SOURCES/Makefile.config. Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64, not the sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should be the same.

Right. It's this modification of the Makefile.config I'm trying to avoid. The way the configs are combined in the spec file mean that we don't need to modify it. It's a semantic difference in how the packaging is done, where I'm trying to reduce or eliminate the need to modify/touch files provided by rh or in the kernel tarball.

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

I've just pushed pushed the update to the sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch. You can find the new 4.2 based kernel at https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-altarch!kernel.git

If you could supply any needed patches for that kernel I'll run through the build.

On 12/02/2015 08:00 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

Hi Jim,

We need to enable newly added configuration, and the only way I could think of is to do it as part of kernel-aarch64.spec utilizing the existing configuration merge mechanism, and without impacting the config-xxx files received from Redhat.

Yes, 4.2 patches are ready. I'll submit as soon as you are ready. However, we still need to resolve the config issue then.

-Phong

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

...

I've been reasonably head-down on getting the new sources built.

I guess my concern here is the need to merge your config changes in each iteration. Is there a particular reason for doing it that way? Are you trying to ensure ordering here?

Also, we'll have the updated builds ready to go in the next few days. I can run with this for the 3.19 update for now, however we'd need the 4.2 patches reasonably soon. Would that be a problem?

On 12/02/2015 03:44 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Do you have any feedback?

-Phong

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Phong Vo pvo@apm.com wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

I am resending the config patch. The change is to use merge.pl to merge config-centos-sig into the final config in SPECS/kernel-aarch64 instead of modifying Makefile.config.

The patch is against branch 3.19 of git://git.centos.org/sig-altarch/kernel.git

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,

-Phong

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

...

On 11/23/2015 09:42 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying SOURCES/Makefile.config. Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64, not the sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should be the same.

Right. It's this modification of the Makefile.config I'm trying to avoid. The way the configs are combined in the spec file mean that we don't need to modify it. It's a semantic difference in how the packaging is done, where I'm trying to reduce or eliminate the need to modify/touch files provided by rh or in the kernel tarball.

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

Got it, thanks.

On 12/09/2015 01:01 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

Hi Jim,

Please find the attached APM patches for 4.2 based kernel.

Thanks,

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 3:55 AM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

I've just pushed pushed the update to the sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch. You can find the new 4.2 based kernel at https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-altarch!kernel.git

If you could supply any needed patches for that kernel I'll run through the build.

On 12/02/2015 08:00 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

We need to enable newly added configuration, and the only way I could think of is to do it as part of kernel-aarch64.spec utilizing the existing configuration merge mechanism, and without impacting the config-xxx files received from Redhat.

Yes, 4.2 patches are ready. I'll submit as soon as you are ready. However, we still need to resolve the config issue then.

-Phong

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

...

I've been reasonably head-down on getting the new sources built.

I guess my concern here is the need to merge your config changes in

each

...

...

iteration. Is there a particular reason for doing it that way? Are you trying to ensure ordering here?

Also, we'll have the updated builds ready to go in the next few days. I can run with this for the 3.19 update for now, however we'd need the

4.2

...

...

patches reasonably soon. Would that be a problem?

On 12/02/2015 03:44 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Do you have any feedback?

-Phong

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Phong Vo pvo@apm.com wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

I am resending the config patch. The change is to use merge.pl to merge config-centos-sig into the final config in SPECS/kernel-aarch64 instead of modifying Makefile.config.

The patch is against branch 3.19 of

git://git.centos.org/sig-altarch/kernel.git

...

...

...

...

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,

-Phong

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org

wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

On 11/23/2015 09:42 AM, Phong Vo wrote: > Hi Jim, > > > > The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a > SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying

SOURCES/Makefile.config.

...

...

...

...

...

> Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64, not

the

...

...

...

...

...

> sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should

be

...

...

...

...

...

> the same. >

Right. It's this modification of the Makefile.config I'm trying to avoid. The way the configs are combined in the spec file mean that

we

...

...

...

...

...

don't need to modify it. It's a semantic difference in how the

packaging

...

...

...

...

...

is done, where I'm trying to reduce or eliminate the need to modify/touch files provided by rh or in the kernel tarball.

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

I hit a snag with the installer segfaulting on specific hardware. I've since resolved that and have pushed an iso for Johnny to test as well. If that works, I'll be syncing the trees and pushing this week.

Your patches will be rolled into an update kernel that will also be available at the same time. This way the install media matches what people expect, and the updates are available to enable the additional features.

On 01/04/2016 07:57 PM, Phong Vo wrote:

Happy New Year, Jim.

I am following up on this submission whether it has been done.

Also, when do we have a full 4.2 release with installer and rootfs?

Thanks,

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:09 PM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

Got it, thanks.

On 12/09/2015 01:01 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Please find the attached APM patches for 4.2 based kernel.

Thanks,

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 3:55 AM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

I've just pushed pushed the update to the sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch. You can find the new 4.2 based kernel at https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-altarch!kernel.git

If you could supply any needed patches for that kernel I'll run through the build.

On 12/02/2015 08:00 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

We need to enable newly added configuration, and the only way I could think of is to do it as part of kernel-aarch64.spec utilizing the existing configuration merge mechanism, and without impacting the config-xxx files received from Redhat.

Yes, 4.2 patches are ready. I'll submit as soon as you are ready. However, we still need to resolve the config issue then.

-Phong

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

...

I've been reasonably head-down on getting the new sources built.

I guess my concern here is the need to merge your config changes in

each

...

...

iteration. Is there a particular reason for doing it that way? Are you trying to ensure ordering here?

Also, we'll have the updated builds ready to go in the next few days.

I

...

...

...

can run with this for the 3.19 update for now, however we'd need the

4.2

...

...

patches reasonably soon. Would that be a problem?

On 12/02/2015 03:44 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Do you have any feedback?

-Phong

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Phong Vo pvo@apm.com wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

I am resending the config patch. The change is to use merge.pl to merge config-centos-sig into the final config in

SPECS/kernel-aarch64

...

...

...

...

...

instead of modifying Makefile.config.

The patch is against branch 3.19 of

git://git.centos.org/sig-altarch/kernel.git

...

...

...

...

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,

-Phong

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org

wrote:

...

...

...

...

> > > On 11/23/2015 09:42 AM, Phong Vo wrote: >> Hi Jim, >> >> >> >> The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a >> SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying

SOURCES/Makefile.config.

...

...

...

...

>> Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64, not

the

...

...

...

...

>> sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should

be

...

...

...

...

>> the same. >> > > > Right. It's this modification of the Makefile.config I'm trying to > avoid. The way the configs are combined in the spec file mean that

we

...

...

...

...

> don't need to modify it. It's a semantic difference in how the

packaging

...

...

...

...

> is done, where I'm trying to reduce or eliminate the need to > modify/touch files provided by rh or in the kernel tarball. > > -- > Jim Perrin > The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org > twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 > _______________________________________________ > Arm-dev mailing list > Arm-dev@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

The build appears to be successful, so I'm going to smoke-test it tonight, and push tomorrow. If all goes well it will hit updates and git tomorrow morning (US/Central time).

On 01/05/2016 08:12 PM, Phong Vo wrote:

Thanks, Jim!

I am attaching an additional patch to fix an issue due to a previous change causing Mellanox driver not to come up. Please see if you can accommodate it in this round of kernel update.

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 11:05 PM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

I hit a snag with the installer segfaulting on specific hardware. I've since resolved that and have pushed an iso for Johnny to test as well. If that works, I'll be syncing the trees and pushing this week.

Your patches will be rolled into an update kernel that will also be available at the same time. This way the install media matches what people expect, and the updates are available to enable the additional features.

On 01/04/2016 07:57 PM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Happy New Year, Jim.

I am following up on this submission whether it has been done.

Also, when do we have a full 4.2 release with installer and rootfs?

Thanks,

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:09 PM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

Got it, thanks.

On 12/09/2015 01:01 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Please find the attached APM patches for 4.2 based kernel.

Thanks,

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 3:55 AM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

I've just pushed pushed the update to the sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch. You can find the new 4.2 based kernel at https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-altarch!kernel.git

If you could supply any needed patches for that kernel I'll run through the build.

On 12/02/2015 08:00 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

We need to enable newly added configuration, and the only way I could think of is to do it as part of kernel-aarch64.spec utilizing the existing configuration merge mechanism, and without impacting the config-xxx files received from Redhat.

Yes, 4.2 patches are ready. I'll submit as soon as you are ready. However, we still need to resolve the config issue then.

-Phong

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

...

I've been reasonably head-down on getting the new sources built.

I guess my concern here is the need to merge your config changes in

each

...

...

iteration. Is there a particular reason for doing it that way? Are

you

...

...

...

...

trying to ensure ordering here?

Also, we'll have the updated builds ready to go in the next few days.

I

...

...

...

can run with this for the 3.19 update for now, however we'd need the

4.2

...

...

patches reasonably soon. Would that be a problem?

On 12/02/2015 03:44 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Do you have any feedback?

-Phong

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Phong Vo pvo@apm.com wrote: > Hi Jim, > > I am resending the config patch. The change is to use merge.pl to > merge config-centos-sig into the final config in

SPECS/kernel-aarch64

...

...

...

...

> instead of modifying Makefile.config. > > The patch is against branch 3.19 of

git://git.centos.org/sig-altarch/kernel.git

...

...

...

> > Let me know what you think. > > Thanks, > > -Phong > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org

wrote:

...

...

...

>> >> >> On 11/23/2015 09:42 AM, Phong Vo wrote: >>> Hi Jim, >>> >>> >>> >>> The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a >>> SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying

SOURCES/Makefile.config.

...

...

...

>>> Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64,

not

...

...

the

...

...

...

>>> sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should

be

...

...

...

>>> the same. >>> >> >> >> Right. It's this modification of the Makefile.config I'm trying to >> avoid. The way the configs are combined in the spec file mean that

we

...

...

...

>> don't need to modify it. It's a semantic difference in how the

packaging

...

...

...

>> is done, where I'm trying to reduce or eliminate the need to >> modify/touch files provided by rh or in the kernel tarball. >> >> -- >> Jim Perrin >> The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org >> twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 >> _______________________________________________ >> Arm-dev mailing list >> Arm-dev@centos.org >> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

Hi Vadim,

The ECAM fixup code is already implemented in current CentOS kernel for X-Gene, thus this patch is not needed for this purpose.

Thanks,

-phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Lomovtsev, Vadim Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 3:37 AM To: Conversations around CentOS on ARM hardware Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

Hi Pong,

Would you consider the patch below, in appliance to x-gene pcie host driver ? http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-January/399221. html

WBR, Vadim ________________________________________ From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org arm-dev-bounces@centos.org on behalf of Phong Vo pvo@apm.com Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2015 10:01 AM To: Conversations around CentOS on ARM hardware Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

Hi Jim,

Please find the attached APM patches for 4.2 based kernel.

Thanks,

-Phong

-----Original Message----- From: arm-dev-bounces@centos.org [mailto:arm-dev-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jim Perrin Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 3:55 AM To: arm-dev@centos.org Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] Next set of APM X-Gene patches

I've just pushed pushed the update to the sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch. You can find the new 4.2 based kernel at https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-altarch!kernel.git

If you could supply any needed patches for that kernel I'll run through the build.

On 12/02/2015 08:00 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

Hi Jim,

We need to enable newly added configuration, and the only way I could think of is to do it as part of kernel-aarch64.spec utilizing the existing configuration merge mechanism, and without impacting the config-xxx files received from Redhat.

Yes, 4.2 patches are ready. I'll submit as soon as you are ready. However, we still need to resolve the config issue then.

-Phong

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:

...

I've been reasonably head-down on getting the new sources built.

I guess my concern here is the need to merge your config changes in

each

...

iteration. Is there a particular reason for doing it that way? Are you trying to ensure ordering here?

Also, we'll have the updated builds ready to go in the next few days. I can run with this for the 3.19 update for now, however we'd need the

4.2

...

patches reasonably soon. Would that be a problem?

On 12/02/2015 03:44 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

Do you have any feedback?

-Phong

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Phong Vo pvo@apm.com wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

I am resending the config patch. The change is to use merge.pl to merge config-centos-sig into the final config in SPECS/kernel-aarch64 instead of modifying Makefile.config.

The patch is against branch 3.19 of

git://git.centos.org/sig-altarch/kernel.git

...

...

...

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,

-Phong

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org

wrote:

...

...

...

...

On 11/23/2015 09:42 AM, Phong Vo wrote:

...

Hi Jim,

The config patch works fine for me. It would be creating a SOURCES/config-centos-sig and also modifying

SOURCES/Makefile.config.

...

...

...

...

...

Actually, the patch is against the 3.19 version of c7-aarch64, not

the

...

...

...

...

...

sig-altarch/kernel 3.19 branch version; but I believe both should

be

...

...

...

...

...

the same.

Right. It's this modification of the Makefile.config I'm trying to avoid. The way the configs are combined in the spec file mean that

we

...

...

...

...

don't need to modify it. It's a semantic difference in how the

packaging

...

...

...

...

is done, where I'm trying to reduce or eliminate the need to modify/touch files provided by rh or in the kernel tarball.

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

---

Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev

-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev