[OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Add more tunes for new ARM processors Cortex-A15 and Cortex-A7

[Martin Jansa]

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 11:36:58PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 21:38 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:56:16PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:44:32AM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 06:51:56PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > From: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys at ti.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > The patchset adds 2 more standard tune files for the new ARM MPCore (multicore)
> > > > > processors Cortex-A15 and Cortex-A7, as per:
> > > > > 
> > > > > http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/cortex-a15.php
> > > > > http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/cortex-a7.php
> > > > 
> > > > Please check this patchset 
> > > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-October/030759.html
> > > 
> > > Yes, I've seen that patchset. Unfortunately it's still in the queue and is 
> > > going through implementation iterations. Once it gets into OE-Core, I'd be 
> > 
> > Nobody commented on last iteration (except of acks from khem). So I
> > don't plan to send another one.
> 
> It was made clear that we were concentrating on the release and these
> were something we'd come back to afterwards. I also made it very clear

I'm not complaining that it wasn't merged yet, just saying that it
should be considered for merging before adding more tune files to fix.

> that I'm opposed to something that is repeatedly getting proposed here.
> Lets just say it is unlikely I will simply change my mind if people keep
> sending it.

AFAIK You were against OPTDEFAULTTUNE and that's not used in last
iteration. Last iteration just defines different PKGARCH for different 
CCARGS as you said:
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1916#c6

> I'm trying to get to the point of reviewing the patches that need
> attention and give more constructive feedback having cleared the less
> problematic ones out the way and shortened the backlog but I'm not there
> yet. Ideally I'd like to take a break entirely but sadly that simply
> isn't going to happen :(. I'll try and get to these as soon as I can but
> there is a substantial queue. 
> 
> I'd also point out I'm getting considerable "feedback" as soon as
> anything goes into master that destabilises the build so when anything
> does merge, fixing fallout is taking priority too.

Yes that's why I'm reporting that fallout as soon as it's merged when
it's something I haven't noticed when patch was on ML. And I know that
you're often the one who fixes it in the end when commiter does not even
reply on those reports, thanks for doing that.

Cheers,

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20121020/cdc1230f/attachment-0002.sig>