On Mon Feb 23, 2026 at 3:51 PM CST, Andrew Davis wrote: > On 2/23/26 2:22 PM, Randolph Sapp via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: >> From: Randolph Sapp <[email protected]> >> >> Add a TI configuration for the BeagleY-AI development board. >> >> Signed-off-by: Randolph Sapp <[email protected]> >> --- >> meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti-k3r5.conf | 7 +++++++ >> meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti.conf | 16 ++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti-k3r5.conf >> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti.conf >> >> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti-k3r5.conf >> b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti-k3r5.conf >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000..88d0888b >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti-k3r5.conf >> @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ >> +#@TYPE: Machine >> +#@NAME: BeagleY-AI (R5F) >> +#@DESCRIPTION: Machine configuration for the BeagleY-AI (R5F core) >> + >> +require conf/machine/include/k3r5.inc >> + >> +UBOOT_MACHINE = "am67a_beagley_ai_r5_defconfig" >> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti.conf >> b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti.conf >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000..088cbd62 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/beagley-ai-ti.conf >> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ >> +#@TYPE: Machine >> +#@NAME: BeagleY-AI (A53) >> +#@DESCRIPTION: Machine configuration for the BeagleY-AI (A53) >> + >> +require conf/machine/include/j722s.inc >> + >> +KERNEL_DEVICETREE_PREFIX = " \ >> + ti/k3-am67a \ >> + ti/k3-j722s \ >> +" >> + >> +KERNEL_DEVICETREE = " \ >> + ti/k3-am67a-beagley-ai.dtb \ >> +" >> + >> +UBOOT_MACHINE = "am67a_beagley_ai_a53_defconfig" > > This defconfig doesn't work if you select an older BSP.
Yeah, I've famously voiced concerns about the BSP provider logic in general, but 6.6 and it's associated BSP profile is frozen. Though the beagley-ai.conf uses j722s_evm_a53_config, the 'k3-j722s-evm.dts' in that profile defines 8GB of DDR, which is clearly wrong. I don't want to see that blow up later. > Thinking on this, the only difference we should have between this machine > config and the one already in meta-beagle is the default selected BSP > (bsp-ti-6_12 vs bb_org-6_12). Why can't we just have the one config and > select the BSP with TI_PREFERRED_BSP? We could do that externally > from the build env, or with a branding. > > The issue with this patch is we would now have two configs for the same > hardware, and there is no TI produced BeagleY, so having the machine > config for it in this layer just seems wrong. I have the same complaint > for beagleplay-ti and beaglebadge-ti, we should drop those too and fix > them in the same way. > > Andrew > The only thing this solution does is obscure this behavior with a new variable and deduplicate what should be static configuration files. I don't really think it's an improvement. - Randolph
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#19570): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/19570 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/117964418/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
