Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH OSSTEST v2 09/19] ts-kernel-build: Additional kernel options for Mustang

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2015-06-18 at 18:55 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("[PATCH OSSTEST v2 09/19] ts-kernel-build: Additional 
> kernel options for Mustang"):
> > XXX We probably need a newer kernel to actually be useful.
> 
> This doesn't seem quite finished ?

Sorry, yes, I forgot about this...

Locally I've set {TREE,REVISION}_LINUX(_ARM) to v4.1-rcN + one upstream
fix (NB: FWIW I heard that 4.1 is due to be the next LTSI version) which
is what I'm testing with. I need to revisit how we will get this in
osstest -- I think I'm going to propose winding the linux-xen-arm tree
to something of that era (Stefano, does that sound ok?).

First I should retest with v3.18 and make sure that really doesn't work
(I had some trouble with it, they may have been my own making though).
If v3.18 works that would be best since I think we will want to wind the
main kernel osstest uses up to that sooner or later.

> > +setopt CONFIG_FHANDLE y
> 
> What does this do and do we care about it on other platforms ?

This is a rebasing mistake, should actually be a separate patch which
Wei already sent "[PATCH OSSTEST v3 11/11] ts-kernel-build: enable
CONFIG_FHANDLE".

> 
> > +# APM XGENE
> > +setopt CONFIG_PHY_XGENE y
> > +#setopt CONFIG_NET_XGENE y
> > +setopt CONFIG_AHCI_XGENE y
> > +setopt CONFIG_POWER_RESET_XGENE y
> > +setopt CONFIG_RTC_DRV_XGENE y
> 
> These are fine.
> 
> > +#arm64 crashes without -- determine why
> > +setopt CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP y
> 
> Ummm.

I suspect this won't be needed with the newer kernel (originally I was
using 3.16 or so), I'll remove it and see.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel