Hao, Do you have any questions about the changes needed here? Will you be sending the updated patch? Please let me know if you need any additional help. Thanks.
-- Denys On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:04:52AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:48:57AM -0400, Maupin, Chase wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Dmytriyenko, Denys > > >Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 11:33 AM > > >To: Zhang, Hao > > >Cc: Maupin, Chase; Shilimkar, Santosh; Rini, Tom; meta- > > >[email protected] > > >Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and K2E boot > > >monitor build support > > > > > >On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:26:13PM -0400, Hao Zhang wrote: > > >> On 5/15/2014 12:22 PM, Maupin, Chase wrote: > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> From: Shilimkar, Santosh > > >> >> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 11:14 AM > > >> >> To: Dmytriyenko, Denys > > >> >> Cc: Maupin, Chase; Zhang, Hao; Rini, Tom; meta- > > >[email protected] > > >> >> Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and K2E > > >boot > > >> >> monitor build support > > >> >> > > >> >> On Thursday 15 May 2014 12:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > >> >>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:06:15PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar > > >> >> wrote: > > >> >>>> On Thursday 15 May 2014 11:56 AM, Maupin, Chase wrote: > > >> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > > >> >>>>>> From: Shilimkar, Santosh > > >> >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 10:39 AM > > >> >>>>>> To: Zhang, Hao; Dmytriyenko, Denys > > >> >>>>>> Cc: Maupin, Chase; Rini, Tom; [email protected] > > >> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and > > >K2E > > >> >> boot > > >> >>>>>> monitor build support > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> On Thursday 15 May 2014 11:07 AM, Hao Zhang wrote: > > >> >>>>>>> On 5/15/2014 10:54 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:41:52AM -0400, Hao Zhang > > >wrote: > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> [..] > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify if you really want all 3 devices > > >> >> installed > > >> >>>>>> all the time or > > >> >>>>>>>>>> do you really want a recipe that installs the boot > > >> >> monitor > > >> >>>>>> per device? I > > >> >>>>>>>>>> know you don't currently have 3 machine types so > > >maybe > > >> >> that > > >> >>>>>> is what is > > >> >>>>>>>>>> feeding your issue here, but my question is whether > > >you > > >> >> need > > >> >>>>>> to have > > >> >>>>>>>>>> separate builds per device. > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> I want all the 3 boot monitors built and installed all > > >the > > >> >>>>>> time in one > > >> >>>>>>>>> recipe, since MCSDK 3.1 supports all the 3 Keystone II > > >> >> devices > > >> >>>>>> in the > > >> >>>>>>>>> same release package. This applies to the U-boot (3 U- > > >boot > > >> >>>>>> build for all > > >> >>>>>>>>> the 3 Keystone II devices) and Linux kernel DTB. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Linux kernel has support for board variations through > > >DTBs, > > >> >>>>>> obviously. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> As of U-boot, in Sitara world we had to manage board > > >> >> variations > > >> >>>>>> by detecting > > >> >>>>>>>> the board at runtime. So, the same single binary would > > >work > > >> >> on > > >> >>>>>> AM335x-EVM, > > >> >>>>>>>> AM335x-SK, BeagleBone White and BeagleBone Black. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> I would recommend you working with Tom Rini and doing > > >it > > >> >>>>>> similarly, so you > > >> >>>>>>>> don't have to build 3 different binaries for 3 slightly > > >> >>>>>> different Keystone > > >> >>>>>>>> baords... > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Three boars for same SOC is different than 3 different > > >SOCs > > >> >> with > > >> >>>>>> their > > >> >>>>>> own boards. We need to support different u-boot configs > > >for > > >> >> that. > > >> >>>>>> And > > >> >>>>>> upstream of the patches work is already in progress with > > >Tom > > >> >>>>>> reviewing > > >> >>>>>> the patches. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> So which one is it? Is this a case of three boards for a > > >> >> single SoC or 3 SoCs with their own boards? > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>> I was just saying you AM example was multiple board for 1 > > >SOC. > > >> >> What Hao is talking > > >> >>>> '3 SOCs with their own boards. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> If those are 3 different SOCs (not just spins or diff part > > >#s), > > >> >> then we should > > >> >>> consider creating 3 different OE machine configs. > > >> >>> > > >> >> yes they are 3 different SOCs with different capabilities > > >> > > > >> > Then Denys is right. We should have 3 different OE machine > > >configs which all share an SOC_FAMILY of "keystone". That way > > >they can re-use as much as possible, but unique differences such > > >as the bootloader, example apps, etc can be easily handled. > > >> > > > >> > > >> Can you show me an example how to do that? > > > > > >meta-ti layer, conf/machine for machine configs and > > >conf/machine/include for > > >SOC configs. > > > > > >examples would be: > > > > > >- am335x-evm.conf and beaglebone.conf both use ti33x.inc SOC > > >definition > > >- dra7xx-evm.conf and omap5-evm.conf both use omap-a15.inc SOC > > > > Denys, > > > > Is there something outstanding here? Does this patch need to be revamped > > now that we have individual machine types? > > Yes, indeed. This recipe should build boot-monitor for current ${MACHINE} and > not all 3 of them together. Similar to kernel and u-boot. > > -- > Denys > -- > _______________________________________________ > meta-ti mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti -- _______________________________________________ meta-ti mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
