>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bruce Ashfield [mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 11:15 AM
>To: Bodke, Kishore K
>Cc: [email protected]; Darren Hart
>Subject: Re: [linux-yocto][PATCH 1/1] meta: Rangeley 32-bit Machine Created
>
>On 12-12-03 02:06 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> From: Kishore Bodke <[email protected]>
>>
>> Initial checkin for the Rangeley 32-bit Machine
>> branch.  This machine is based on the Avoton SoC
>> with nCPM.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kishore Bodke <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>   .../bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-preempt-rt.scc       |   18 +++++++++++
>>   .../bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-standard.scc         |   17 +++++++++++
>>   .../cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.cfg |   32
>++++++++++++++++++++
>>   .../cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.scc |   26
>++++++++++++++++
>>   4 files changed, 93 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-
>preempt-rt.scc
>>   create mode 100644 meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-
>standard.scc
>>   create mode 100644 meta/cfg/kernel-
>cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.cfg
>>   create mode 100644 meta/cfg/kernel-
>cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.scc
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-preempt-
>rt.scc b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-preempt-rt.scc
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..52fe54b
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-preempt-rt.scc
>> @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
>> +define KMACHINE rangeley32
>> +define KTYPE preempt-rt
>> +define KARCH i386
>> +
>> +# no new branch required, re-use the ktypes/preempt-rt branch
>> +include ktypes/preempt-rt
>> +branch rangeley32
>> +
>> +include rangeley32.scc
>> +
>> +# Extra rangeley32 configs above the minimal defined in rangeley32.scc
>> +include cfg/efi-ext.scc
>> +
>> +# default policy for preempt-rt kernels
>> +include cfg/usb-mass-storage.scc
>> +include cfg/boot-live.scc
>> +include features/latencytop/latencytop.scc
>> +include features/profiling/profiling.scc
>> diff --git a/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-standard.scc
>b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-standard.scc
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..70ca60c
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32-standard.scc
>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
>> +define KMACHINE rangeley32
>> +define KTYPE standard
>> +define KARCH i386
>> +
>> +include ktypes/standard
>> +branch rangeley32
>
>Are there any code differences between this board and the
>64 bit rangeley ? If so, you don't need a new board branch, just
>re-use the rangeley branch.

No code difference. One board with two machines. 32-bit and 64-bit.

Existing Rangeley branch is on 64-bit branch.
Can we use the same branch for the 32-bit as well?
I was using this for 32 bit in BSP files
KBRANCH_rangeley32  = "standard/rangeley32"
And for 64 bit
KBRANCH_rangeley64  = "standard/common-pc-64/rangeley"

>
>> +
>> +include rangeley32.scc
>> +
>> +# Extra rangeley32 configs above the minimal defined in rangeley32.scc
>> +include cfg/efi-ext.scc
>> +
>> +# default policy for standard kernels
>> +include cfg/usb-mass-storage.scc
>> +include cfg/boot-live.scc
>> +include features/latencytop/latencytop.scc
>> +include features/profiling/profiling.scc
>> diff --git a/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.cfg
>b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.cfg
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..a57897a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.cfg
>> @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
>> +CONFIG_X86_32=y
>> +CONFIG_MATOM=y
>> +CONFIG_PRINTK=y
>> +
>> +# Basic hardware support for the box - network, USB, PCI, sound
>> +CONFIG_ATA=y
>> +CONFIG_PCI=y
>> +CONFIG_MMC=y
>> +CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI=y
>> +CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_PCI=y
>> +CONFIG_PCIEPORTBUS=y
>> +CONFIG_NET=y
>> +CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y
>> +CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SG=y
>> +CONFIG_SOUND=y
>> +CONFIG_SND=y
>> +CONFIG_I2C=y
>> +CONFIG_SND_HDA_INTEL=y
>> +CONFIG_SATA_AHCI=y
>> +CONFIG_AGP=y
>> +CONFIG_PM=y
>> +CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_LCD_SUPPORT=y
>> +CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE=y
>> +CONFIG_INPUT=y
>
>I would have expected this to be the same config as the 64 bit .cfg,
>but this is significantly different.
>
>I'm not familiar with how the rangeley name is being used to map to
>the board, I expected that this was just a 32 bit build of the existing
>board, but the changes here lead me to believe more is changing.
>
>If so, why doesn't this just get a new BSP name ?
>

Yeah, most of them are common.  I would have to try out 
with the same 64 bit.cfg.  
This is same except that it is 32-bit.

COMPATIBLE_MACHINE_rangeley32 = "rangeley32"
KMACHINE_rangeley32  = "rangeley32"
KBRANCH_rangeley32  = "standard/rangeley32"

COMPATIBLE_MACHINE_rangeley64 = "rangeley64"
KMACHINE_rangeley64  = "rangeley"
KBRANCH_rangeley64  = "standard/common-pc-64/rangeley"


>> +
>> +# Make sure these are on, otherwise the bootup won't be fun
>> +CONFIG_UNIX=y
>> +CONFIG_INET=y
>> +CONFIG_MODULES=y
>> +CONFIG_SHMEM=y
>> +CONFIG_TMPFS=y
>> +CONFIG_PACKET=y
>
>These all come from the base configs and should be dropped, we've
>been working on getting all boards updated that have this repeated
>information.
>

Will remove them.

>> diff --git a/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.scc
>b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.scc
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..6ff3f73
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/rangeley32/rangeley32.scc
>> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
>> +kconf hardware rangeley32.cfg
>> +
>> +include cfg/x86.scc
>> +include cfg/dmaengine.scc
>> +include features/power/intel.scc
>> +include features/ixgbe/ixgbe.scc
>> +include features/igb/igb.scc
>> +
>> +# required for Intel DPDK Support
>> +include features/intel-dpdk/intel-dpdk.scc
>> +
>> +#These features are required for Intel QAT Software
>> +include features/pci-iov/pci-iov.scc
>> +include features/pci/pci.scc
>> +include features/ciphers/ciphers.scc
>> +include features/crypto/crypto.scc
>> +
>> +# Add smp support
>> +include cfg/smp.scc
>> +
>> +# Enable GCC inlining
>> +include features/inline/inline.scc
>> +
>> +include cfg/efi.scc
>> +include features/usb/ehci-hcd.scc
>> +include features/usb/ohci-hcd.scc
>
>I'd think that these should be in the -standard.scc, just like they are
>for the main rangeley board.
>
>But .. yet, this is largely the same as the rangeley.scc file with
>a few items moved around (efi is above the smp.scc in the rangeley, etc),
>so this makes me think that the difference really is only 32 vs 64 bit.
>

Yeah most of these are not in -standard.scc in the main Rangeley board.
They are in Rangeley.scc.   Will move them similar to main board.

Thanks
Kishore.
_______________________________________________
linux-yocto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto

Reply via email to