On Mon, 31 Aug 2020, Bjorn Andersson via System-dt wrote:
> On Mon 31 Aug 16:04 UTC 2020, Tomas Evensen via System-dt wrote:
> 
> > Here are some brief notes from the meeting.
> > 
> > If nothing else as a showcase on how much we miss Nathalie when she is on 
> > vacation ????
> > 
> > Krzysztof Kepa – GE
> > Mathieu Poirier – Linaro
> > Etsam Anjum – Mentor
> > Anrnoud Pouliquen – ST
> > Loic Pallardy - ST
> > Suman Anna - TI
> > Dan Milea – Wind River
> > Mark Dapoz – Wind River
> > Tomas Evensen – Xilinx
> > Stefano Stabellini – Xilinx
> > Bruce Ashfield – Xilinx
> > Ed Mooring – Xilinx
> > Ben Levinsky - Xilinx
> > 
> > Stefano went through slides.
> > Overall idea:
> > 
> >   1.  Specify remoteproc channels with minimal information in System-DT in 
> > a way that is as common as possible for all vendors.
> > In particular, we are avoiding to have to specify the same memory regions 
> > in more than one place. A resource group is specially marked to contain 
> > most information.
> >   2.  Use Lopper to create the vendor specific remoteproc specification
> > Generating reserved-memory, etc. information that has duplicate information.
> > For the time being, no plans to unify the vendor specific information that 
> > goes into the traditional device tree for Linux
> >   3.  Later (or in parallel), but without making it a gating item, start 
> > discussions on what we can do to unify the vendor specific information in 
> > the traditional DT
> 
> Can anyone point me to some examples of vendor specific information
> referred to here?

Some of the other attendees might have better examples than this. The
ones I was mentioning this morning are the "mboxes" and "mbox-names"
properties you can see in the "output.txt" example. Also the memory
regions listed under the "memory-region" property and under
"reserved-memory".
_______________________________________________
boot-architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture

Reply via email to