[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] <ding> "Bring out your dead" <ding>...
frank.rowand at am.sony.com
Tue Jun 26 22:55:31 UTC 2012
On 06/26/12 12:55, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 June 2012, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
< snip >
>> 3) Things that are being considered for removal are least likely to
>> see an advantage by being on the bleeding edge. Take the MCA case.
>> If you'll allow me the conclusion that MCA on 3.5 wouldn't have
>> been any fundamentally better than MCA on 3.4 -- then you can
>> get on the (semi announced) 3.4 LTSI train, and have a supported
>> kernel base for your MCA that will take you well into the year 2014!
> Very interesting point. This could also help give some life to hobbyist
> projects. So if we were to remove ia64 support in 3.5, 3.4-ltsi could
> be the "official" ia64 upstream kernel until it gets replaced by
> 3.9-ltsi or so ;-)
That does not seem consistent with the purpose of LTSI.
Copying from the recent LinuxCon Japan presentation by Hisao Munakata
slides 13 and 14, code can be integrated to LTSI from:
- upstream (several cases)
- from SoC vendor
- from SoC vendor tree
- submitted upstream, still in review
- not mainlined, chip workaround
- from product producer, distribution
- in-house bug-fix
- private enhancement (with strict review)
- not mainlined open-source project
- ideally mainline attempt has been made
- LTSI project will help re-attempt mainlining
- LF / CEWG funded open project
More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss