Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Allwinner SoC Still Unlikely For Upstream Linux Kernel

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,353

    Default Allwinner SoC Still Unlikely For Upstream Linux Kernel

    Phoronix: Allwinner SoC Still Unlikely For Upstream Linux Kernel

    While Allwinner ARM SoCs are found within massive amounts of the low-cost Android tablets manufactured in China, and there is some open-source Allwinner Linux kernel support, it's still unlikely that the patches will land upstream anytime soon...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM4NDc

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    394

    Default

    would also love for rockchip to support something other than android from the get go.

    The quad core mk908 is great:

    http://liliputing.com/2013/04/tronsm...nce-video.html


    for the price, I think these things are the future and we must not let android have this market all by itself.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    23

    Default

    This is most unfortunate, as mainlined Allwinner support would enjoy all the latest kernel updates and enhancements in a timely manner. I hope these issues start to get resolved in the months to come.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    148

    Default

    hardware manufacturers produce shitty code unless beaten with a 10 foot pole, news at 11

    seriously, was there a case in which a new contributor to Linux had their patches mainlined in first iteration (or with just few minor changes, like renaming few functions, fixing spelling mistakes, etc.)?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Even if Allwinner isn't doing things right on their end, a good deal of support for their SoCs has been written by third parties and is already in the Linux kernel, with even more ongoing:
    http://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort

    The story seems to totally miss that this effort exists and how advanced it is. It of course would be great if Allwinner themselves did things properly to begin with. It'll be interesting to see how they react to this.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,064

    Default

    I've been playing with some of these chinese SoC devices. I'm finding that the price is definitely related to the quality. You pay $30, and you get the quality-proportional equivalent to something that would be about $200 from a more reputable manufacturer.

    There is also another major barrier to adding support for these things upstream; although there are *some* kernel sources, the word *some* is really REALLY meaningful. You end up with some weird parts like having several binary-only kernel modules, for things like NAND. Rockchip NAND drivers are actually based strongly on MTD, but their own adjustments are BAD (crash prone, for example), and binary only.

    We here WERE using allwinner and/or rockchip based tablets and STB's, but for tablets, we've found it actually CHEAPER to use Google Nexus units. We also plan to move over to a more mainstream SoC for STB's, and are waiting for these guys to move past the "pre-order" stage: http://www.inforcecomputing.com/prod...o/ifc6410.html

    I really couldn't care less if the china SoC's were supported.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •