On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 16:52 +0300, ext Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> A: No.
> Q: Should I top-post?
>
> > If you're a device manufacturer, and you build, say 50 devices that
> all
> > use the same hardware but, because they are optimized for different
> > functional use cases, have different preferred operating points and
> > DVFS policies, it's *highly* desirable to not have to maintain 50
> > separate builds for those devices. Putting configuration
> information
> > in places that can be changed independently of compilation is very
> > important to us.
>
> You'll still need to maintain 50 different userlands, so I do not
> think that issue is _so_ important.
Hi,
the complexity/burden of maintenance depends on how the data to be
flashed is partitioned and the flashing stages used in production.
Mantaining 50 different kernel versions _and_ 50 different rootfs images
is more complex than having just a single kernel.
Of course a module would live in intfs or rootfs, so that would mantain
a single package, but it would introduce extra dependancies between
kernel version and rootfs version.
Especially if module support has to be enabled just because of it.
> Anyway, lets get in core first, than talk about userspace interface
> for chanig operating points, ok?
:D I think everybody has agreed on that, but it's important that
production-related issues are understood.
--
Cheers,
Igor
Igor Stoppa (Nokia M - OSSO / Tampere)
