> -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Balister [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 12:38 PM > To: Manjukumar Harthikote Matha <[email protected]>; Nathan Rossi > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [meta-xilinx] [PATCH] machine-xilinx-default.inc: Default to > u-boot for > Zynq > > On 04/26/2017 03:06 PM, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Nathan Rossi [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 10:54 AM > >> To: Manjukumar Harthikote Matha <[email protected]> > >> Cc: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [meta-xilinx] [PATCH] machine-xilinx-default.inc: > >> Default to u-boot for Zynq > >> > >> On 27 April 2017 at 02:41, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha > >> <manjukumar.harthikote- [email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:meta-xilinx- > >>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Nathan Rossi > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 4:57 AM > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Subject: [meta-xilinx] [PATCH] machine-xilinx-default.inc: Default > >>>> to u-boot for Zynq > >>>> > >>>> Upstream U-Boot provides an almost complete environment for the > >>>> majority of Zynq targets and specifically covers all the boot > >>>> functionality required for the boards in the meta-xilinx layer. As > >>>> such default to > >> the mainline version of U-Boot. > >>>> > >>>> For users that require or prefer to use u-boot-xlnx this can be > >>>> selected on a per- machine basis using: > >>>> > >>>> PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader = "u-boot-xlnx" > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Nathan Rossi <[email protected]> > >>>> --- > >>>> conf/machine/include/machine-xilinx-default.inc | 1 + > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/conf/machine/include/machine-xilinx-default.inc > >>>> b/conf/machine/include/machine-xilinx-default.inc > >>>> index 13e4df5746..f9e7e3a33f 100644 > >>>> --- a/conf/machine/include/machine-xilinx-default.inc > >>>> +++ b/conf/machine/include/machine-xilinx-default.inc > >>>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ PREFERRED_VERSION_linux-xlnx ?= "4.6-xilinx-v2016.4%" > >>>> > >>>> # U-Boot Configuration > >>>> XILINX_DEFAULT_UBOOT := "u-boot-xlnx" > >>>> +XILINX_DEFAULT_UBOOT_zynq := "u-boot" > >>>> XILINX_DEFAULT_UBOOT_zynqmp := "u-boot" > >>> > >>> Why have any preferred_provider? Distro can provide these settings. > >>> For ex: meta-petalinux can provide u-boot-xlnx, oe-core can provide > >>> u-boot > >>> > >>> Any thoughts? > >> > >> Unfortunately not picking a provider for "virtual/bootloader" will > >> result in bitbake attempting to build all providers (since > >> EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS is depending on virtual/bootloader), as bitbake > >> has no idea which one is desired (and they are all compatible). > >> > >> -- > >> NOTE: multiple providers are available for virtual/bootloader > >> (u-boot-xlnx, u-boot- xlnx-dev, u-boot) > >> NOTE: consider defining a PREFERRED_PROVIDER entry to match > >> virtual/bootloader ... > >> ERROR: Multiple .bb files are due to be built which each provide > >> virtual/bootloader ... > >> <various failures due to overlapping files/etc.> > >> -- > >> > >> Also note, meta-petalinux or other layers should already be able to > >> override this default (by setting with ??=) either in a distro conf > >> or in a machine conf e.g. zynq- generic (for meta-petalinux). > >> > > If this is the case then why meta-xilinx should peg to upstream u-boot by > > default? > It should peg to u-boot-xlnx or linux-xlnx by default. We know that there are > patches/drivers which are not upstreamed yet, and only available in Xilinx > specific > tree. This layer is specific to Xilinx updates and should stick to defaults > supported by > Xilinx. Other distros or layer stack which use meta-xilinx should override > depending > on their requirements not the other way round. > > PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader = "u-boot" should be specific to > > boards > other than the Xilinx eval boards, for example in zybo/microzed. > > I'd be happiest if meta-xilinx used upstream u-boot and a bbappend to add > patches > that are not upstream yet. This way we (the consumers) know exactly what the > delta > is to upstream. > Yes agreed on the methodology, that it would be the best if we maintained patchset on top upstream master for u-boot or kernel. But currently we don't have this model, and pinning down meta-xilinx to upstream u-boot by default and not fetching Xilinx specific trees is not the right answer as well. meta-xilinx should ideally point to Xilinx trees, we have an option either via distro or local.conf to change it to upstream at any given point. We also can point certain evaluation boards (zybo/microzed/picozed etc) to upstream u-boot or kernel.
> In this day and age, using non-mainline u-boot and kernel leads to future > pain. (Yes, I > have some old pain from using linux-xlnx) I agree, but certain drivers are not up-streamed and we are doing our best to get them up-streamed. Thanks Manju > > Philip > > > > > > Thanks > > Manju > > > > > >> Regards, > >> Nathan > > > > > > This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named > recipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary, > privileged or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended > recipient, > do not read, copy, or forward this email message or any attachments. Delete > this > email message and any attachments immediately. > > This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary, privileged or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, copy, or forward this email message or any attachments. Delete this email message and any attachments immediately. -- _______________________________________________ meta-xilinx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx
