Is Freescale going to move various drivers from 2.6.35 to mainline?

[SamGandhi]

I am working on a  board designed for iMX28 for industrial application. However we want to use some of the features available in 3.X kernel.So we are compelled to use mainline 3.X kernel.

What we are finding is lot of the (excellent) work that freescale has done for 2.6.35 is not to be found in mainline kernel anywhere.I have checked mainline repo, pengutronix, linux-arm git repos.

Example CPU frequency scaling support available in 2.6.35 from kernel is not there in mainline, same for usb utm.

Is Freescale in the process of moving this code in 2.6.35 to mainline (mach-mxs) structure? If freescale is not doing does anybody know if there anybody in community working on this. I could contribute stuff I have done so far and see if that gets mainlined.

Also does freescale maintain a git repo where one can find latest linux kernel for various SOCs?

-Sam

[Noel_V]

Hi

Some back-ground info, I'm working on a custom i.MX53x platform (not on i.MX28).

Compiling and booting a recent  kernel (3.5.4) is not a problem, I do agree on that.

But I'm still missing some major drivers for the i.MX53x in the mainline kernel.

In the customized FSL 2.6.x kernel, all drivers are there, BUT as jezus question (the question before this one) ..

Is the old FSL 2.6.x a good choice for new developments????

The reason for my question/trigger was a poll for information to see if anyone managed to build a recent kernel with all the features/drivers.

And I think that many FSL i.MXxxx users/developers, don't like the fact the development seems to be on HOLD or even HALTED for I.MXxxx.

At least this is the IMPRESSION I have, I might (and I hope) that I'm wrong....

Regards Noel

[samsaprunoff]

Good day Noel,

I have the same impression as you... for some reason Freescale (corporately) is not nearly as active with supporting the iMX as with their other families... Freescale support personnel are excellent and trying their best, but there only appears to be a handful available that have the time and knowledge to support this product line.   I am unsure as to the reason for this and it could be that Corporately Freescale is relying or "highly" encouraging customers to use their 3rd party affiliates (i.e. TimeSys, Mentor, Microsoft, etc)?  All I know is that I have been battling with things for quite a while now and it is difficult for me to embrace the iMX line for some upcoming new products because of this...

Anyway... in regards to your other comments...  Having spoke to a number of colleagues, surveyed the web, etc I found no one is using Ltib, etc for any released products (only for testing, etc).  Whether this is true in the majority of cases is unknown to me, but it certainly makes a statement.

Cheers.

Sam

[Noel_V]

Hi Sam,

Well I'm working some months, on a customized iMX53x platform, .. had to cope with some bugs the (fsl-uboot) bootloader, had to face some fsl-2.6.x kernel troubles too, but at this time all seems quite stable on the fsl-2.6.x kernel.

Due to the fact that this soft (bootloader and kernel) are not recent it is very hard (almost impossible)  to REPORT your findings back to the community... everybody that is working on the kernel(s) / bootloader(s), is working an a recent (and official versions).

In other words nobody is wants/needs old stuff ...

To bad that there is no real iMX-team (or what ever your want to name it) that keeps track on the recent uboot and kernel versions, they (fsl) would  have a GREAT benefits of following these recent developments.

FYI: not I'm using LTIB , i'm using  BUILROOT  for all my targets (iMX and others ... :-)

Regards,

Noel

[fabio_estevam]

Hi Noel,

Do you see any particular missing feature in mainline U-boot for mx53? Please let me know.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam

[Noel_V]

Hi Fabio,

Well don't get me wrong, I just mentioned U-boot , to clarify that is is petty that fsl is/was not using/following the mainline  stuff.

About U-boot : As said before , I had to tackle some problems in U-boot that took me some time to find (more then a week)

Note : This was when the FSL version of U-boot, some moths ago when the U-boot version was not the mainline version) .

When now (last week) looking at the mainline version of U-boot it seems that this problem does not exist (at first look).

As you might recall the Question I came up with (i.o.w. the thread I wanted to revive) was about the Kernel (for iMXxx) and not u-boot, u-boot got into the picture to clarify some things.

I understand that it is a battle to keep up with the latest versions(if you are not using the main-line)  it is going fast (very fast) .. but the only way to follow the latest developments, thats by trying to get the iMX stuff into the mainline kernels.

Anyway, Thank you for your prompt responses, this showed me (and other iMX users) that there is activity on the next

Kernel, for the iMX SoC.

Best Regards,

Noel

[Noel_V]

Hi all,

Trying to keep this thread alive...  lots of people seem to have the same question/trouble.

Anyone more info on this?

What is being done to include these drivers into the mainline kernels?

Regards Noel

[fabio_estevam]

Noel,

Support on mainline kernel for i.mx has been improving well.

The following drivers are currently supported:

  - MMC
  - AUART
  - DUART
  - NAND
  - LCD
  - CAN
  - DMA
  - Sound (saif and sgtl000 codec)
  - I2C
  - PWM
  - USB host
  - USB Phy
  - PWM
  - Backlight pwm

  - Dual FEC

Regards,

Fabio Estevam

[JAlvarez]

Will the i.MX28 SPI, GPIO and ADC eventually be supported in the mainline kernel? At first glance those seem to be the main peripherals missing from your list.

Also, on which 3.x kernels are these i.MX28 drivers operational? Is the current stable 3.5.4 kernel a better choice for new i.MX28 deployments than the customized FSL 2.6.x kernel distributed with the EVK?

[fabio_estevam]

Jesus,

SPI, GPIO and LRADC are supported already in linux-next tree and will appear in 3.7-rc1.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam

[JAlvarez]

Fabio,

Thanks for your prompt response.

Other than the missing drivers, would the current stable 3.5.4 kernel be a better choice for new i.MX28 deployments than the customized FSL 2.6.x kernel distributed with the EVK?

Since this topic has discussed both i.MX28 and iMX53 deployments, you may also want to clarify whether the base drivers (timers, UART, etc.) are common to all i.MX processors.

Regards,

Jesus Alvarez

[samsaprunoff]

Good day Noel,

You  may wish to message Robert Schwebel here or at his firm Pengutronix.de to ask this question, as I understand that he was involved with porting the iMX28 to Mainline.

Cheers,

Sam

[VladanJovanovic]

Freescale Public GIT

There's quite a lot of drivers for i.MX28 available in mainline kernel now already. Some of the things are still not there, but everybody is welcome to contribute to the project.