[Automated-testing] [Openembedded-architecture] Yocto Project LTS Proposal/Discussion

[akuster808]

On 10/26/19 12:37 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 10:34:44AM -0400, Rich Persaud wrote:
>> ...
>> To avoid YP users assuming that YP and/or the upstream kernel has done hardware testing for YP LTS, we may want to document specific testing actions that are expected from YP LTS users.  E.g. should YP downstreams work directly with CKI via the Linux Foundation, to pool hardware test results?  Should they report hw test results to other YP LTS users?
> Aren't the testing actions expected from YP LTS users the same as for
> any other YP user?
>
> My understanding is that the hardware support provided by YP is just an 
> example BSP mainly used by YP, and real-world project get their hardware 
> support either from a 3rd party layer or from 3rd party git trees.
>  

That all depends on how well a particular SOC is supported in the
kernels provided by YP.  Many SoC upstream there changes these days. You
may have noticed an increase in BSP kernel configs going in along with
patches to support a broader range of MACHINE's. If you are getting a
bleeding edge SOC, then you may be using a 3rd party layer.
>> ... 
>> If we are able to attract contributions, could we eventually associate YP LTS external test results with public BSP definitions and hardware model/revision numbers?
> Isn't this more a topic for the 3rd party BSP layers that are actually 
> providing this hardware support?
>
>> Rich
> cu
> Adrian
>