[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH 3/3] imx6qsabrelite/defconfig: Enable devtmpfs

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Eric Nelson
<eric.nelson at boundarydevices.com> wrote:
> On 12/21/2012 11:41 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Eric Nelson
>> <eric.nelson at boundarydevices.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/21/2012 10:19 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Recent versions of udev (182 in OE-core) need devtmpfs to operate
>>>>> correctly
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Merged to master with reworded commit log and bump PR.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Otavio,
>>>
>>> I have a configuration patch to make, adding CONFIG_FEC_NAPI.
>>>
>>> Should I submit it with a bump in PR as you did, or without, so
>>> that you can coordinate that?
>>
>>
>> Please do it with bump in PR so it is easier for me.
>>
>>> The patch itself is to prevent network performance from cratering
>>> under load as discussed in this blog post:
>>>          http://boundarydevices.com/i-mx6-ethernet/
>>>
>>> And in this patch:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://github.com/boundarydevices/linux-imx6/commit/38d622938f1352a6550a5e38c624b46b6929439f
>>>
>>> Without it, network receive performance can get really bad under
>>> load.
>>
>>
>> Very nice! However you might like to simply sync the patch for your
>> boundary tree (the patch compares FSL branch with Bondary ones) so
>> this would be included. Or this should be applied in all boards?
>>
>
> Well... I was thinking that I'd just push this one, since it has a much
> bigger impact than the patches we made to flow control and error
> handling.
>
> I think I was a bit mistaken though. I didn't catch that this line was
> itself in a patch file:
>         +# CONFIG_FEC_NAPI is not set
>
> I also didn't catch and don't quite understand how the defconfig file
> is applied in the build process. Is 'nitrogen6x_defconfig' even used?
>
> I don't see CONFIG_FEC in the defconfig. Does that file somehow get
> applied on top of a base configuration to apply Yocto specifics?

The defconfig, at linux-imx-<version> is generated using the machine
config and calling make savedefconfig; so it should be the shorter
version and produce same .config as result of dependencies.

So the build system copy the defconfig onto .config, run "yes 'n' |
make oldconfig" and build the kernel.

You can sync the 12.09.01 branch and update the patch at:

http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-fsl-arm/tree/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-imx-3.0.35/imx6qsabrelite/sync-boundary-changes.patch

and updated:

http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-fsl-arm/tree/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-imx-3.0.35/imx6qsabrelite/defconfig

As I did the trick of using sabrelite as fallback to nitrogen board
(check https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm-extra/blob/master/conf/machine/nitrogen6x.conf#L6)
it will use those, except a nitrogen specific one is provided. I did
it to avoid duplicating things and easy maintenance.

> There are some things in our boundary-L3.0.35_12.09.01_GA tree that
> I was hoping to clean up before submitting
>
> In particular, we set things up to allow a single image to boot on
> Quad->Solo that the Freescale team didn't like, so we'll probably

It'd be nice indeed. Why they didn't like it?

> revert it as we migrate to the 2012-10 branch, which will take a
> couple of weeks.

So revert back to several images depending on SoC model?

Regards,

--
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio at ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br