Talk:Include:Arm support matrix: Difference between revisions
(ARM hardware matrix issue) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
The matrix as it stands may lead to think ARM is for Pi only, which it is not.<br> | The matrix as it stands may lead to think ARM is for Pi only, which it is not.<br> | ||
Maybe we should have 2 different matrices: one only on HW for main page (just CPU cores, not talking about defconfigs), and another one on Pi Page that dives into the Pi specific models and defconfigs.<br> | Maybe we should have 2 different matrices: one only on HW for main page (just CPU cores, not talking about defconfigs), and another one on Pi Page that dives into the Pi specific models and defconfigs.<br> | ||
Thoughts? [[User:Macmpi|Macmpi]] ([[User talk:Macmpi|talk]]) 14: | Thoughts (made few tweaks to hopefully clarify)? [[User:Macmpi|Macmpi]] ([[User talk:Macmpi|talk]]) 14:48, 05 November 2025 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 14:47, 5 November 2025
In fact this matrix mixes 2 dimensions (hardware and kernel builds) which may be a bit confusing from non-Pi ARM users.
Indeed armv7/aarch64 hardware is supported by several kernels: generic upstream (linux-lts/linux-stable) like for all other hardware platforms, and custom Pi (linux-rpi with Pi foundation downstream patches and defconfigs). For armhf it's only Pi.
The matrix as it stands may lead to think ARM is for Pi only, which it is not.
Maybe we should have 2 different matrices: one only on HW for main page (just CPU cores, not talking about defconfigs), and another one on Pi Page that dives into the Pi specific models and defconfigs.
Thoughts (made few tweaks to hopefully clarify)? Macmpi (talk) 14:48, 05 November 2025 (UTC)