Re: Deploying new code to snapshots.linaro.org

[John Rigby]

Probably related or same issue.  On the old site I was able to
download hwpacks with for example:

 wget -q -k --no-cookies --header 'Cookie: redirectlicensephp=200'
http://oldsnapshots.linaro.org/precise/hwpacks/lt-snowball/latest/hwpack_linaro-lt-snowball_20120815-254_armhf_supported.tar.gz

This no longer works and I get the license acceptance page instead.

--john

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 4:39 AM, Ricardo Salveti
 wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Danilo Šegan  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In the next hour or so we'll be deploying new code to
>> snapshots.linaro.org (the web site itself): this means full BUILD-INFO
>> support for those that care.
>
> Please, avoid landing such intrusive changes at a friday next time,
> specially at the friday just before the release :-)
>
>> Since the release is right around the corner, we are ready to roll back
>> as soon as someone notices a problem.
>
> Seems we got a few issues at the Ubuntu side:
>  - Failures while publishing all the image related jobs (already fixed)
>  - All the pre-built images are now failing as fetch image doesn't
> work with current snapshots.l.o
>
> Fathi should know more, as he's currently trying to get everything to
> work properly again.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Ricardo Salveti de Araujo

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: jenkins ubuntu kernel build jobs for 2012.08

[John Rigby]

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 10:16 AM, John Rigby  wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy)  wrote:
>> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:05 -0600, John Rigby wrote:
>>> Here is a summary of the updates from 2012.07.
>> 
>>> All jobs are in this view:
>>> https://ci.linaro.org/jenkins/view/New%20Ubuntu%20Packaged%20Kernels/
>>>
>>> Detailed info on repos, branches, configs and such are in each job's header.
>>
>> Including links to the hwpacks :-)
>>
>> I second Ricardo's comment of 'Awesome!'
>>
>> Thanks for your work John.
>>
>> Now, if I can have my cake and eat it too, what's next, LAVA testing and
>> links to results? ;-)
> That is a work in progress:)
> The LAVA submission is working for most bsps, polling of lava results is next.
s/bsps/kernels/
>>
>> --
>> Tixy
>>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: jenkins ubuntu kernel build jobs for 2012.08

[John Rigby]

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy)  wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:05 -0600, John Rigby wrote:
>> Here is a summary of the updates from 2012.07.
> 
>> All jobs are in this view:
>> https://ci.linaro.org/jenkins/view/New%20Ubuntu%20Packaged%20Kernels/
>>
>> Detailed info on repos, branches, configs and such are in each job's header.
>
> Including links to the hwpacks :-)
>
> I second Ricardo's comment of 'Awesome!'
>
> Thanks for your work John.
>
> Now, if I can have my cake and eat it too, what's next, LAVA testing and
> links to results? ;-)
That is a work in progress:)
The LAVA submission is working for most bsps, polling of lava results is next.
>
> --
> Tixy
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

jenkins ubuntu kernel build jobs for 2012.08

[John Rigby]

Here is a summary of the updates from 2012.07.

Naming convention:
  *linux-linaro-SOCNAM* use Andrey's linux-linaro branch
  *linux-linaro-lt-SOCNAME* use a landing team branch
  *linux-linaro-llt-SOCNAME* use Andrey's linux-linaro-tracking branch
(3.4 based)


3.5 jobs disabled because linux-linaro and lt's have moved to 3.6
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-vexpress-3.5
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-origen-3.5
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-lt-vexpress-3.5

3.4 llt jobs remaining because linux-linaro-tracking is still 3.4 based
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-llt-omap-3.4
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-llt-origen-3.4
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-llt-vexpress-3.4

3.x lt jobs remaining
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4
tilt-3.4 branch is still active
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-lt-origen-3.5
branch is now ubuntu-tracking
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-lt-u8500-3.4
unsure of status

new 3.6 linux-linaro and lt jobs
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-vexpress-3.6
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-origen-3.6
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-lt-origen-3.6
based on tracking branch which is a work in progress and not 
yet stable
package-and-publish-linux-linaro-lt-vexpress-3.6

All jobs are in this view:
https://ci.linaro.org/jenkins/view/New%20Ubuntu%20Packaged%20Kernels/

Detailed info on repos, branches, configs and such are in each job's header.

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Config check fails for linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0

[John Rigby]

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:35 AM, David Cullen
 wrote:
> Hello, John,
>
> On 7/10/2012 5:39 PM, John Rigby wrote:
>> There will shortly be a new kernel
>> linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4_3.4.0-1.1~120710203036 in the kernel ppa:
>> https://code.launchpad.net/~linaro-maintainers/+archive/kernel
>> with the kernel_build issue fixed.
>>
>> Now we can get back to the original issue.
>
> That did fix the "kernel_build" problem, but I still see this
>
>> Running config-check for all configurations ...
>>
>> check-config: 
>> /tmp/tmp.nh0bAR6k1r/CONFIGS/armel-config.flavour.linaro-lt-omap: loading 
>> config
>> check-config: 
>> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/debian.linaro/config/enforce: 
>> loading checks
>> check-config: FAIL: value CONFIG_INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS y
>> check-config: 43/44 checks passed -- exit 1
>> check-config: 
>> /tmp/tmp.nh0bAR6k1r/CONFIGS/armhf-config.flavour.linaro-lt-omap: loading 
>> config
>> check-config: 
>> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/debian.linaro/config/enforce: 
>> loading checks
>> check-config: FAIL: value CONFIG_INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS y
>> check-config: 43/44 checks passed -- exit 1
>>
>> *** ERROR: 2 config-check failures detected
>
>
> when I run
>
> # fakeroot debian/rules editconfigs
>
> A search for the configuration item produces no results:
>
>
>> find . -name Kconfig -exec grep -H INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS '{}' ';'
>
Yes this is expected because that config option is introduced by a
ubuntu patch that is not in this tree.  I changed some of the scripts
to make this error non-fatal but the output gives no indication of
that.  I will change that so it is clear that this is a warning or I
will make a change to the config checker to only require the option if
it exists.

thanks
john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Config check fails for linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0

[John Rigby]

There will shortly be a new kernel
linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4_3.4.0-1.1~120710203036 in the kernel ppa:
https://code.launchpad.net/~linaro-maintainers/+archive/kernel
with the kernel_build issue fixed.

Now we can get back to the original issue.

--john

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:47 AM, David Cullen
 wrote:
> Hello, John,
>
> On 7/10/2012 12:52 PM, John Rigby wrote:
>> I thnk we need to start at the beginning.  Where did you get the
>> source you are working with.  In your original post I assumed that
>> this was source extracted with dpkg-source from a linaro kernel source
>> pkg.
>
>
> I used
>
> apt-get source linux-image-3.4.0-1-linaro-lt-omap
>
> Then I extracted the tarball.  The tarball comes from the Linaro
> repository:
>
>
>> Get:1 http://ppa.launchpad.net/linaro-maintainers/kernel/ubuntu/ 
>> precise/main linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4 3.4.0-1.1~120627131801 (tar) [204 MB]
>
>
> So Linaro appears to have a defect in the kernel source package in
> their repository.  This goes along with a defect I found in the
> linux-headers package for the same kernel.
>
>
>> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:19 AM, David Cullen
>>  wrote:
>>> Hello, linaro-dev,
>>>
>>> I am using the instructions in the "adjust kernel config" section at
>>> this link:
>>>
>>>> https://wiki.linaro.org/KenWerner/Sandbox/CreateCustomKernelDeb
>>>
>>> When I run
>>>
>>> # fakeroot debian/rules editconfigs
>>>
>>> I get the the following errors:
>>>
>>>> Running config-check for all configurations ...
>>>>
>>>> check-config: 
>>>> /tmp/tmp.Sv8FblIPLa/CONFIGS/armel-config.flavour.linaro-lt-omap: loading 
>>>> config
>>>> check-config: 
>>>> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/debian.linaro/config/enforce: 
>>>> loading checks
>>>> check-config: FAIL: value CONFIG_INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS y
>>>> check-config: 43/44 checks passed -- exit 1
>>>> check-config: 
>>>> /tmp/tmp.Sv8FblIPLa/CONFIGS/armhf-config.flavour.linaro-lt-omap: loading 
>>>> config
>>>> check-config: 
>>>> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/debian.linaro/config/enforce: 
>>>> loading checks
>>>> check-config: FAIL: value CONFIG_INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS y
>>>> check-config: 43/44 checks passed -- exit 1
>>>>
>>>> *** ERROR: 2 config-check failures detected
>>>
>>> I am using config-3.4.0-1-linaro-lt-omap as my initial .config.  A
>>> search for INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS in the Kconfig files produces no
>>> results:
>>>
>>> find . -name Kconfig -exec grep -H INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS '{}' ';'
>>>
>>> When I extract the source to a temporary directory and search the
>>> "kernel_build" subdirectory (that John Rigby told me to delete), I
>>> find it in
>>>
>>> ./init/Kconfig:config INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS
>>>
>>> So, now I am really confused.  Is the real source in the
>>> "kernel_build" subdirectory?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thank you,
>>> David Cullen
>
>
> --
> Thank you,
> David Cullen
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Config check fails for linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0

[John Rigby]

David,

I thnk we need to start at the beginning.  Where did you get the
source you are working with.  In your original post I assumed that
this was source extracted with dpkg-source from a linaro kernel source
pkg.

--john

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:19 AM, David Cullen
 wrote:
> Hello, linaro-dev,
>
> I am using the instructions in the "adjust kernel config" section at
> this link:
>
>> https://wiki.linaro.org/KenWerner/Sandbox/CreateCustomKernelDeb
>
> When I run
>
> # fakeroot debian/rules editconfigs
>
> I get the the following errors:
>
>> Running config-check for all configurations ...
>>
>> check-config: 
>> /tmp/tmp.Sv8FblIPLa/CONFIGS/armel-config.flavour.linaro-lt-omap: loading 
>> config
>> check-config: 
>> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/debian.linaro/config/enforce: 
>> loading checks
>> check-config: FAIL: value CONFIG_INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS y
>> check-config: 43/44 checks passed -- exit 1
>> check-config: 
>> /tmp/tmp.Sv8FblIPLa/CONFIGS/armhf-config.flavour.linaro-lt-omap: loading 
>> config
>> check-config: 
>> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/debian.linaro/config/enforce: 
>> loading checks
>> check-config: FAIL: value CONFIG_INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS y
>> check-config: 43/44 checks passed -- exit 1
>>
>> *** ERROR: 2 config-check failures detected
>
> I am using config-3.4.0-1-linaro-lt-omap as my initial .config.  A
> search for INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS in the Kconfig files produces no
> results:
>
> find . -name Kconfig -exec grep -H INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS '{}' ';'
>
> When I extract the source to a temporary directory and search the
> "kernel_build" subdirectory (that John Rigby told me to delete), I
> find it in
>
> ./init/Kconfig:config INIT_PASS_ALL_PARAMS
>
> So, now I am really confused.  Is the real source in the
> "kernel_build" subdirectory?
>
> --
> Thank you,
> David Cullen

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: What is the purpose of the kernel_build subdirectory in the Linaro kernel source?

[John Rigby]

just remove it

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:15 AM, David Cullen
 wrote:
> Hello, John,
>
> On 7/9/2012 9:20 PM, John Rigby wrote:
>> This is probably a bug in the new kernel packaging scripts.  I will
>> check into it.
>
>
> Can I just remove the "kernel_build" subdirectory for now?  Or
> should I build the kernel out of the "kernel_build" subdirectory?
>
>
>> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:30 PM, David Cullen
>>  wrote:
>>> Hello, linaro-dev,
>>>
>>> I just created a TAGS file for the Linaro kernel source and I
>>> noticed that there is a "kernel_build" subdirectory:
>>>
>>> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/kernel_build
>>>
>>> What is the purpose of this directory?
>>>
>>> When I run "make ARCH=arm TAGS", it includes the source in this
>>> directory, so it appears that all files are tagged twice.
>
>
> --
> Thank you,
> David Cullen

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: What is the purpose of the kernel_build subdirectory in the Linaro kernel source?

[John Rigby]

This is probably a bug in the new kernel packaging scripts.  I will
check into it.

--john

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:30 PM, David Cullen
 wrote:
> Hello, linaro-dev,
>
> I just created a TAGS file for the Linaro kernel source and I
> noticed that there is a "kernel_build" subdirectory:
>
> /home/work/linux-linaro-lt-omap-3.4-3.4.0/kernel_build
>
> What is the purpose of this directory?
>
> When I run "make ARCH=arm TAGS", it includes the source in this
> directory, so it appears that all files are tagged twice.
>
> --
> Thank you,
> David Cullen
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Unable to build linux-linaro-tracking (3.4) with CPU_IDLE

[John Rigby]

>
>
> This is done. llt-20120626.0 should be ok (build tested with CPU_IDLE
> enabled).
> BTW, compared to the previous llt-20120613.0, llt-20120626.0 has vexpress
> support, and (as a side effect of adding vexpress) gator upgraded from
> 5.10.0 to 5.10.1.
>
>
I will add an llt-vexpress-3.4 kernel variant and respin all three llt kernels.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Are we going to start using config fragments?

[John Rigby]

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy)  wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 08:15 -0600, John Rigby wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy)  wrote:
>
>> > Now, if the Ubuntu kernel packaging scripts could gain an option to
>> > generate a config from these fragments... :-)
>> >
>> That will happen soon.
>
> I should point out that at the moment we don't have config fragments for
> panda or snowball, and I don't know if the other teams are going to get
> involved. If it is difficult making config fragment use optional, I
> could reverse engineer fragments for these boards from the current
> configs used for Ubuntu. (I am assuming that configs are currently hard
> coded in the kernel packaging scripts and not generated from another
> source?)

For lt kernels we get configs from the here:
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/jcrigby/linux-lt-ci-pack-info.git;a=heads

I intend to ignore those in the new scripts if the config fragments
exist so we can support both methods at first until we get config
fragments for all kernels.

For non lt kernels the configs are in the packaging.  This bad to have
linux-linaro work differently that lt and I will be making all things
the same soon.

--john


>
> --
> Tixy
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Are we going to start using config fragments?

[John Rigby]

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy)  wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 12:45 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
>> On 06/06/2012 07:09 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
>> > Are we going to start using the config fragments we created a while ago?
>> > (Or did we not reach consensus on that?)
>> I wouldn't say there was a strong consensus.  But I think we should push
>> to make it available at an infrastructure level so those who do want to
>> use it can.
>
> Actually, I just went back a re-read the old thread about config
> fragments. I can't seem to find anything like a consensus, but I don't
> want to give up, so here is what I plan to do...
>
> Create a git repo, (kernel/configs.git ?)
>
> Have a branch called config-core-tracking which will contain
>
>  linaro-base.conf
>  ubuntu.conf
>  android.conf
I think I missed something in an earlier thread.  If I merge this into
a kernel tree do they land in the root of the tree, or are you going
to prepend a directory?  Also are these core and lt config fragment
branches intended to be topics in Andrey's result tree?
>
> the idea being that this is a topic branch to pull into
> linux-linaro-core-tracking. I'll also keep config-core-3.X branches for
> previous linux versions, so people lagging tip have access to them.
>
> I'll put the vexpress/origen/imx5 fragments into a branch called
> config-boards-tracking so they are available to experiment with. Though
> I believe that any Landing Team wanting to use config fragments for
> their kernel would want to add their fragment to their working tree as a
> topic instead.
>
> Now, if the Ubuntu kernel packaging scripts could gain an option to
> generate a config from these fragments... :-)
>
That will happen soon.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: clone speed on jenkins

[John Rigby]

http://summit.linaro.org/lcq2-12/meeting/20856/ubuntu-leb-review-current-ci-process/

is not specific to kernel ci but seems to be the best match

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:41 AM, John Rigby  wrote:
> I think there is a kernel ci session.
>
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Alexander Sack  wrote:
>> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:03 PM, John Rigby  wrote:
>>> Lets discuss this next week.  I understand your point about the squid proxy.
>>
>> Sounds good. Is there a particular session where this could fit in?
>>
>> --
>> Alexander Sack
>> Technical Director, Linaro Platform Teams
>> http://www.linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
>> http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: clone speed on jenkins

[John Rigby]

I think there is a kernel ci session.

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Alexander Sack  wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:03 PM, John Rigby  wrote:
>> Lets discuss this next week.  I understand your point about the squid proxy.
>
> Sounds good. Is there a particular session where this could fit in?
>
> --
> Alexander Sack
> Technical Director, Linaro Platform Teams
> http://www.linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
> http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: clone speed on jenkins

[John Rigby]

Lets discuss this next week.  I understand your point about the squid proxy.

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Alexander Sack  wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Deepti Kalakeri
>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:17 AM, John Rigby  wrote:
>>>
>>> I believe from experience on a local host that having a precloned tree
>>> of for example current upstream linus on jenkins to use with
>>> --reference could be a huge win.  We can discuss this in the kernel-ci
>>> session at connect.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, having a precloned repository on master would help the faster builds.
>> CI Maintainers job
>> https://ci.linaro.org/jenkins/view/Linux%20Maintainers/job/linux-maintainers-kernel_build-Andrey/
>> already makes use of this.
>> We have a clone available on master @
>> http://ci.linaro.org/kernel_git_repo/kernel/linux.git.
>> Please let me know your requirement so that I can make the improvements
>> further if required.
>> Right now you cannot access
>> http://ci.linaro.org/kernel_git_repo/kernel/linux.git  as it needs apache
>> restart and I cannot do that instantly as there are jobs running on jenkins
>> .
>> I will fix it as soon as the jenkins have no further jobs running.
>>>
>>> --john
>>
>
> remember that our http: proxy is set up in a way that it should not
> make much of a diff...
>
> The thing is that we have to transfer a complete linux tree to the
> slave node no matter what.
>
> Whether you --reference something on master or use the master hosted
> squid shouldn't make any significant net difference.
>
> So bottom line: I don't think you will win much, but I am happy to be
> proofen wrong.
>
>
> --
> Alexander Sack
> Technical Director, Linaro Platform Teams
> http://www.linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
> http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

what does this status in jenkins build q mean

[John Rigby]

I see this pop up with hovering over some kernel ci jobs in build queue:

'All nodes of label "kernel_cloud" are offline'

Does this mean something is broken or will it recover on its own?

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

clone speed on jenkins

[John Rigby]

I believe from experience on a local host that having a precloned tree
of for example current upstream linus on jenkins to use with
--reference could be a huge win.  We can discuss this in the kernel-ci
session at connect.

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: new IRC channel: linaro-lava

[John Rigby]

We need an irc aggregator to flatten all the channels to one on rx and
broadcast on tx for those of use who want to live in a flat world (only
half kidding:)

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Andy Doan  wrote:

> On 05/10/2012 03:57 AM, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Andy Doan  wrote:
>>
>>> We have a new channel on FreeNode for LAVA specific discussions:
>>>
>>>  #linaro-lava
>>>
>> snip
>
>
>> Do we really need another extra channel?
>>
>> I believe the current list is already too much, and the lava folks are
>> the ones that are the most active at #linaro currently (which is good
>> :-).
>>
>> Seems that now we have the following IRC channels (could be even more):
>> - #linaro
>> - #linaro-lava
>> - #linaro-android
>> - #linaro-armhf
>> - #linaro-kernel
>> - #linaro-big.little
>> - #linaro-multimedia
>>
>> Which is a bit too much, at least for me.
>>
>
> I know everyone thinks "they're special", but in the case of #linaro-lava,
> I do think there's some value. We have some people who are interested in
> LAVA but not so much Linaro. So the signal-to-noise ratio on #linaro is a
> bit high. In my old role I would have complained about adding another
> channel. However, I've enjoyed the split the past 2 days.
>
> That said, I think the users of #linaro-lava need to be proactive about
> moving conversations to #linaro when appropriate.
>
> -andy
>
>
> __**_
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/**mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [ANN] Disk upgrade on ci.linaro.org today

[John Rigby]

Paul,

Not sure if it has anything to do with the upgrade but I am not able
to create new jobs,  I tried with and without the copy existing
option.

https://pastebin.linaro.org/529/

--john

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Paul Sokolovsky
 wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012 12:53:15 +0300
> Paul Sokolovsky  wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> The Infrastructure team works on improving disk layout on Jenkins
>> build systems to avoid common cases of errors which lead to unexpected
>> downtime. We recently migrated android-build.linaro.org to new
>> partition setup, and would like to proceed with ci.linaro.org.
>>
>> This is potentially multi-step process, so we want to start it
>> ASAP to not risk it protruding into release rush time.
>>
>> So, we'd like to schedule a downtime at 14:00 UTC today, expected
>> duration is 1 hr. Please let me know if you have any issues with that
>> time.
>
>
> Upgrade is complete, everything was performed in one stage. Please
> let Infra team know if you face any issues.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Paul
>
> Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
> Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro
> http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Linaro U-Boot 12.04 released

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:50 AM, John Rigby  wrote:
> Version 12.04 of Linaro U-Boot has been released.  Details on Launchpad here:
> https://launchpad.net/u-boot-linaro/trunk/12.04
>

Thanks to multiple people pointing out that upstream had updated to
v2012.04.01 to include some critical patches.  Linaro u-boot has been
rebased to this.

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Linaro U-Boot 12.04 released

[John Rigby]

Version 12.04 of Linaro U-Boot has been released.  Details on Launchpad here:
https://launchpad.net/u-boot-linaro/trunk/12.04

And on git.linaro.org here:
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=boot/u-boot-linaro-stable.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/Linaro-u-boot-2012.04

>From the release notes:
This release is primarily a rebase onto the latest upstream
git.denx.de release v2012.04. Several patches that have been carried
in u-boot-linaro have been dropped because that functionality has gone
upstream. This includes OMAP[345] usb support including network
support on Panda and Beagle xM and the Highbank support from Calxeda.
This release continues to include some Snowball support but not enough
to be usable. This release also still requires the cache disabling
patch for OMAP3 that has been carried for months but upstream remains
broken with Linaro kernels without it. See Changelog for list of all
patches to v2012.04.

Here are the Linaro patches on top of upstream v2012.04:
0b07b6e PXE: OMAP4: add standard env vars
9f4c29c arm: omap4_panda: Enable pxecfg support
948aae2 SAUCE: OMAP4 Make pxe boot fallback default boot
21c1a80 OMAP3: Beagle: Add standard addresses to env
c448146 OMAP3: Beagle: Enable PXE support
84d1169 OMAP3: igep0020: Enable PXE support
1f18000 MX53LOCO: Enable PXE boot
efa46fe ARM: vexpress: move files in preparation for adding a new platform
6721629 ARM: vexpress: create A9 specific board config
3dbbeb8 ARM: vexpress: create A5 specific board config
b4673ba ARM: vexpress: Change maintainer for ARM Versatile Express platforms
8366422 ARM: vexpress: Extend default boot sequence to load script from MMC
f412e91 net: allow setting env enetaddr from net device setting
9ac3e2d ARM: highbank: add autoboot script files
de80572 ARM: highbank: update autoboot bootdelay value
5c7d44e Add a default env that will use boot.scr from the vfat partition
d74b1a8 Origen: Enable CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT
ed3b575 MMC: arm_pl180_mmci: allow multiple devices
6185c31 mx53loco: define ERRATUM_ESDHC111
1b02df5 mx5: Add clock config interface
2fd31d5 mx53loco: PMIC: Add dialog pmic support
c450b5d mx53loco: Add power init support
bfc8de9 mx53loco: workaround VPU TO2 Errata by increasing peripheral voltage
459a66c mx53loco: add support for MC34708
996306c arm: imx6q: add axi cache and qos setting
7ebf30e arm: imx6q: add anatop regulator init
67db864 fec_mxc: increase autonegotiation timeout
5a67a40 fec_mxc: move autonegoatiate restart after mii_postcall
a7f6854 OMAP4: avoid null pointer access in save_boot_params
b66a9b6 OMAP4: Make mmc and fat conditional in spl
f388f20 OMAP4: Panda: Add usb peripheral boot
06fb246 OMAP4: Panda: Add USB_SPL variant
1631036 OMAP4: Force PXE booting when booting via spl-usb
4c62942 snowball: igloo copy port of armv7/u8500 and include/asm/arch-u8500
f68b175 snowball: igloo copy port of gpio driver support
2afb10a snowball: add snowball to boards.cfg
9053991 snowball: igloo copy port of board specific files
602bef8 snowball: arm cpu: inv and clean of L2
e3e64ab HACK: Copy in alternate mmc files for snowball
c64a8a5 HACK: Bypass normal mmc if CONFIG_SNOWBALL_MMC_HACK
90b88ef debugX to debug
368cfd9 SAUCE: Snowball: init serial later
aca528b PXE: look for usbethaddr if no ethaddr
f1ed411 OMAP4 Panda: Generate a unique usbethaddr
923c7d8 OMAP3: Beagle: add back boot.scr support
9b2844c OMAP4: Panda: add uEnv.txt support
047161d OMAP4: Enable command line editing in omap4_common.h
554498e OMAP4: change MAXARGS to 32
46e0a24 OMAP3: Enable command line editing for omap3_beagle
1bf66b5 Allow loading of u-boot.bin for backward compatibility
9e97fcb OMAP3: Beagle: set mac addr from dieid
0a957f5 SAUCE: HACK: move omap spl base address
1551b1a OMAP4: add preEnv.txt support
d4f7dc9 OMAP3 Beagle: add preEnv.txt support
05613f5 Revert "arm: Add Prep subcommand support to bootm"
6f8db25 Revert "armv7: adapt omap3 to the new cache maintenance framework"

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [Activity] (Omar Ramirez) Apr 2 - Apr 8

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Christian Robottom Reis
 wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 08:24:51PM -0500, Omar Ramirez Luna wrote:
>> == Omar Ramirez  ==
>>
>> === Highlights ===
>>
>> * Working on device tree for mailbox:
>>
>> Find a kernel that works with DT for pandaboard (OMAP4):
>>  - k3.4-rc1 doesn't recognize DT blob, k3.3 DT panics at boot.
>>  - DT has to be appended to zImage.
>>
>> Find a DT uboot:
>>  - secretlab.ca uboot doesn't have usb support for panda, having
>> problems with fatload and mmc.
>>  - linaro uboot has problems recognizing dt blob in memory (bootm
>> ${kern} -  ${dtb}; doesn't work properly).
>
> This is a bit unexpected -- is there really nobody currently booting
> Panda using a DT?
The routine tests we do on each monthly release test for device tree
and this test has passed for panda for months now.  That is the LT
kernel that may include some DT patches so maybe that explains this?

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: jenkins really broken right now

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Loïc Minier  wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012, John Rigby wrote:
>> Looks like initial git clones always fail.  I tried a simple job that
>> just trys to run git and it fails.
>
>  Alexander noticed too; new ci.linaro.org setup was launching jobs which
>  were actually pointing at old ci.linaro.org setup as web proxy.  When
>  the old instance was shut down, it exposed the problem.  Problem is
>  that new instance doesn't have squid installed/configured.  We need to
>  restore the config and any other missing bits.
>

My jobs seem to be working again, I guess without the proxy for now
but working none the less.  Thanks to all for fixing this.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

jenkins really broken right now

[John Rigby]

Looks like initial git clones always fail.  I tried a simple job that
just trys to run git and it fails.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: looking for sources for beagle u-boot/u-boot SPL for 1201 images

[John Rigby]

Added u-boot-linaro to existing bug.  Marked the qemu bug invalid.
Will fix soon.

On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Peter Maydell  wrote:
> On 21 February 2012 20:55, John Rigby  wrote:
>> Forwarding to all after I realized my answer only went to Peter:
>> That manifest entry points to the u-boot-tools package which is
>> userland package containing mkimage so not really what you want.
>>
>> Your email reminds me we need to do this better like we now do for the
>> kernel.  But that does not help you. Given the date of that hwpack I
>> would guess that the u-boot was last months release:
>>
>> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=boot/u-boot-linaro-stable.git;a=commit;h=a7aebf03597d9661ad0e5241c12e448e980800b4
>
> Thanks. With the aid of those sources I was able to determine that
> the bug I was looking at:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu-linaro/+bug/928580
> seems to be a u-boot bug. get_board_mem_timings() doesn't
> recognise the Beagle C4 + Micron 0xba NAND combo[*] and so falls
> into the xM case for 512MB RAM. Since that's twice as much RAM as
> we actually have things quickly go pear-shaped.
>
> [*] not just a qemu-ism, there's a boot of real hardware with
> that part here:
> http://osdir.com/ml/beagleboard/2011-09/msg00604.html
>
> Where should I report this?
>
> Thanks
> -- PMM

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: looking for sources for beagle u-boot/u-boot SPL for 1201 images

[John Rigby]

Forwarding to all after I realized my answer only went to Peter:
That manifest entry points to the u-boot-tools package which is
userland package containing mkimage so not really what you want.

Your email reminds me we need to do this better like we now do for the
kernel.  But that does not help you. Given the date of that hwpack I
would guess that the u-boot was last months release:

http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=boot/u-boot-linaro-stable.git;a=commit;h=a7aebf03597d9661ad0e5241c12e448e980800b4

Thanks for pointing this out.  We will eliminate the guessing next time.


On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Peter Maydell  wrote:
> Hi. I'm trying to track down the sources that made the U-Boot and
> U-Boot SPL for the beagle 1201 release image:
>  http://releases.linaro.org/images/12.01/oneiric/nano/
> sources.txt says that's this hwpack:
>  http://releases.linaro.org/12.01/ubuntu/oneiric-hwpacks/
> but the manifest.txt there:
>  http://releases.linaro.org/12.01/ubuntu/oneiric-hwpacks/hwpack_linaro-omap3_20120123-1_armel_supported.manifest.txt
> only says:
>  u-boot-tools=2011.06-3ubuntu1
>
> and doesn't say where I should find this version of the package.
>
> I guessed that it might be the u-boot package 2011.06-3ubuntu1 from
> oneiric, but that does not seem to contain the SPL code, so I'm
> guessing it's the wrong one. (Also U-Boot announces itself as
> "U-Boot 2011.12 (Jan 22 2012 - 00:52:03)" so that manifest is
> clearly a load of rubbish...)
>
> Can anybody help?
>
> thanks in advance
> -- PMM

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Screen going black with power saving disabled

[John Rigby]

maybe this will help?
http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-1063566.html

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:33 AM, E V  wrote:
> Sorry for the late response. Got some problems at work, and left this for
> some while. Now, I have been asigned back to it, and keeps the same.
>
>  I turned off power using ubuntu 11.10 method [
> http://www.liberiangeek.net/2011/10/ubuntu-screen-going-blank-dark-on-you-stop-it-in-ubuntu-11-10-oneiric-ocelot/ ]
> since that is the version used in the linaro image I got working.
>
>  Problem is that although it works for the most times, there are few cases
> in which screen goes black. If you reboot the board, it may work ok.
>
>  If possible, I would like to remain in the same version of linaro (I really
> hate finding new errors and realizing later that had been introduced by
> software updates, and not by my code...)
>
>  I had similar issues with a Beagle clone, and solved it messing with the
> kernel (disabling the function that made the screen go black) but I prefer
> not to do that kind of things... Probably because of my lack of confidence
> (I am not a software guy, just an electronics engineer who has been assigned
> to a software project...) I prefer to use regular kernels (I mean, not to
> modify anything).
>
>  I am using omap4-extras (Since my application plays videos -or tries to...-
> at 1080p). I am not really sure if this can have been introduced by this
> add-on, because I had it installed from the very beginning.
>
>  Linaro version is 11.11
>
>  Thanks in advance, and please forgive any mistakes in my text.
>
> 2012/1/29 nivr 
>>
>> Would you mind explaining how you disabled the power saving?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> ___
>> linaro-dev mailing list
>> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
>> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>>
>
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Ubuntu LEB 12.01 RC images

[John Rigby]

the panda results page it view only for me, I'm sure I must be doing
something wrong

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ricardo Salveti
 wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> Just like to announce the Ubuntu LEB 12.01 RC images, and the pointers
> for people that want to check the testing progress and such (or even
> helping testing them).
>
> Currently we're tracking our test cases at
> https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/QA/TestCases/Ubuntu (most of them
> requires manual effort at the moment, but we're improving that with
> LAVA in the following weeks). If you think about any other important
> test case that we might be missing here, please let me know and we can
> add it at our testing cycle.
>
> You can find all the 12.01 RC builds (for all boards and image
> flavors) at http://snapshots.linaro.org/oneiric/, with build id
> 20120123-1.
>
> For our four main boards we also have a testing spreadsheet, were we
> publish the official release testing, done by the dev plat engineers.
> You can find the links at
> https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/DevPlatform/Testing (note that you
> can find the bug reports from the test cases by looking at the QA page
> tag links).
>
> Fathi will be coordinating all respin requests in the next following
> days at linaro-release m-l, and the final image will be published this
> thursday, at releases.linaro.org.
>
> Please also be sure to publish any bug report with the RC images
> against https://launchpad.net/linaro-ubuntu, or just contact us at
> #linaro @ freenode
> (https://wiki.linaro.org/MeetTheTeam#Developer_Platform).
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Ricardo Salveti de Araujo

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Finding source code for Linaro kernels

[John Rigby]

The CI autopackaged TI 3.1 kernels all land here:
https://github.com/jcrigby/packaged-linux-linaro-3.1-ci/commits/lt-omap/

All 3.1 LT and non LT kernel land there in different branches but each
branch gets overwritten with each new merge so you need the tag to
find a particular release.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 3:52 PM, John Rigby  wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
>>> For everyone who packages kernel trees:
>>>
>>>
>>> I've had some questions about getting the source for linaro kernel
>>> packaged, and it seems that this is still not straightforward:
>>>
>> ...
>>
>> This seems reasonable to me.  This month we are adding CI auto
>> packaging/building for LT kernels so I will add the Vcs-Git setting to
>> these CI scripts.
>
>
> I think at the moment, we're just pasting it from the vanilla kernel
> packaging, which is why we end up with a pointer to the wrong tree
> (but that's partly guesswork on my part)
>
> Do you know if the TI packaged kernels already in a tree somewhere?  I
> had someone trying to find that specifically.
>
> Cheers
> ---Dave

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Finding source code for Linaro kernels

[John Rigby]

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
> For everyone who packages kernel trees:
>
>
> I've had some questions about getting the source for linaro kernel
> packaged, and it seems that this is still not straightforward:
>
...

This seems reasonable to me.  This month we are adding CI auto
packaging/building for LT kernels so I will add the Vcs-Git setting to
these CI scripts.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [GIT PULL] essential u-boot patches for imx6 sabrelite

[John Rigby]

Thanks Eric, I'll get these into 2012.1.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Eric Miao  wrote:
> The following changes since commit cba9a894fdb1cb49b60fcd1d1d6919cbd7995dd5:
>
>  Prepare v2011.12 (2011-12-23 20:25:35 +0100)
>
> are available in the git repository at:
>  git://git.linaro.org/bsp/freescale/u-boot-linaro.git lt-imx6
>
> Dirk Behme (1):
>      i.mx: i.mx6q: add the initial support for i.mx6q Sabre Lite board
>
> Eric Miao (2):
>      i.mx6q: mx6qsabrelite: Change default mmcdev and boot command
>      net/eth.c: fix eth_write_hwaddr() to use dev->enetaddr as fall back
>
> Fabio Estevam (1):
>      sdhc_boot: Introduce CONFIG_FSL_FIXED_MMC_LOCATION option
>
> Jason Chen (1):
>      i.mx: i.mx6q: add aisp tz init for Off-Platform Peripheral
>
> Jason Liu (5):
>      i.mx: fsl_esdhc: add the i.mx6q support
>      i.mx: i.mx6q: Add the enet clock function
>      fec: add the i.mx6q enet driver support
>      i.mx6q: arm2: Add the enet function support
>      i.mx6q: mx6qsabrelite: Add the ethernet function support
>
>  MAINTAINERS                                   |    1 +
>  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/clock.c                |    5 +
>  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/soc.c                  |   10 +
>  board/freescale/common/Makefile               |    2 +-
>  board/freescale/common/sdhc_boot.c            |    2 +
>  board/freescale/mx6qarm2/mx6qarm2.c           |   90 +
>  board/freescale/mx6qsabrelite/Makefile        |   42 
>  board/freescale/mx6qsabrelite/imximage.cfg    |  170 
>  board/freescale/mx6qsabrelite/mx6qsabrelite.c |  259 
> +
>  boards.cfg                                    |    1 +
>  drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c                       |   12 +-
>  drivers/net/fec_mxc.c                         |   10 +
>  drivers/net/fec_mxc.h                         |    7 +-
>  include/configs/MPC8536DS.h                   |    1 +
>  include/configs/P1010RDB.h                    |    1 +
>  include/configs/P1_P2_RDB.h                   |    1 +
>  include/configs/P2020COME.h                   |    1 +
>  include/configs/P2020DS.h                     |    1 +
>  include/configs/P2041RDB.h                    |    1 +
>  include/configs/corenet_ds.h                  |    1 +
>  include/configs/mx6qarm2.h                    |   13 +-
>  include/configs/mx6qsabrelite.h               |  171 
>  include/configs/p1_p2_rdb_pc.h                |    1 +
>  net/eth.c                                     |    3 +-
>  24 files changed, 797 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 board/freescale/mx6qsabrelite/Makefile
>  create mode 100644 board/freescale/mx6qsabrelite/imximage.cfg
>  create mode 100644 board/freescale/mx6qsabrelite/mx6qsabrelite.c
>  create mode 100644 include/configs/mx6qsabrelite.h

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

latest linux-linaro-3.1 compile errors

[John Rigby]

With the latest 3.1.5 merge linux-linaro-3.1 fails to build on Jenkins:

https://ci.linaro.org/jenkins/view/All%20CI/job/linux-linaro-3.1_panda-omap2plus/303/

  GEN .version
  CHK include/generated/compile.h
  UPD include/generated/compile.h
  CC  init/version.o
  LD  init/built-in.o
  LD  .tmp_vmlinux1
`oprofile_arch_exit' referenced in section `.init.text' of
arch/arm/oprofile/built-in.o: defined in discarded section
`.exit.text' of arch/arm/oprofile/built-in.o
`oprofile_arch_exit' referenced in section `.init.text' of
arch/arm/oprofile/built-in.o: defined in discarded section
`.exit.text' of arch/arm/oprofile/built-in.o

I originally saw this with my packaged kernel builds so checked the
unpackaged version to see if it was a config/sauce issue from
packaging.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Upstreaming patches for u-boot?

[John Rigby]

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Lalancette, Christopher
 wrote:
> Hello John,
>     I'm currently working on bringing up a new OMAP4 board that is
> similar in many respects to the pandaboard.  While playing around with
> the panda, I've noticed that upstream u-boot (from denx.de) has several
> problems, starting with getting the USB/Ethernet hub up and running.
> Additionally, I've noticed that the u-boot-linaro-stable tree seems to
> work well on the same hardware.
>
>     Is there currently a plan for upstreaming some of the patches that
> are currently being carried in u-boot-linaro-stable?  If you needed some
> help with this, I think I could find a bit of time to help out, though I
> would only be able to personally test OMAP4 patches.  Before starting
> anything, though, I wanted to check in to see if there was a plan or if
> this work was ongoing.
>
Hi Chris,

Yes help would be wonderful.  The patches that make usb work were
"orphaned" by the original contributer and I grabbed them and made
them work for me.  They need extra clean up to go upstream which I
have not had time todo.  I will be doing a new u-boot-linaro-stable
once upstream v2011.12 comes out.  At that time it would be great if
you could grab the relevant patches, clean them up and send upstream.
I have no plans to do this right now so if you want to do it that
would be fantastic.

I'll ping you when I have a new -stable tree working.  If you don't
notice on your own.

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Linaro Kernel October 2011 Release

[John Rigby]

Here is my workaround for now.  I brought forward the dt support from 3.0.

git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-precise.git
001947f dt: Linux dt usage model documentation
b5f9d90 arm/dt: vexpress: add basic DT platform matching support
b2b9f46 arm/dt: Add basic devicetree support to IGEPv2 and v3
84afe31 arm/dt: Add a make rule to build dtb for enabled boards
f4575a6 arm/dt: Add basic device tree support for Beagleboard
2f332b62 arm/dt: Add basic device tree support for mx51 and mx53 boards
2e19aec arm/dt: Add basic device tree support for overo
41a788d arm/dt: Add basic device tree support for smdkv310 board
13d38b1 arm/dt: Add Pandaboard devicetree support

I left out the tegra and irq stuff.  This works for panda I have not
tested any other platforms yet.

--john

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:33 PM, John Rigby  wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Nicolas Pitre  
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, John Rigby wrote:
>>
>>> This tree seems to be missing per board dt support so booting with a
>>> device tree doesn't seem to work.  Need something like for example
>>> this commit that added it for panda in the 3.0 tree:
>>>
>>> commit d24e9a194c2ed4ca56b8f4e7d96038cd3af3fda8
>>> Author: Grant Likely 
>>> Date:   Tue Jul 5 23:42:31 2011 -0600
>>>
>>>     arm/dt: Add Pandaboard devicetree support
>>>
>>>     Enable basic device tree support on Pandaboard
>>>
>>>     Signed-off-by: Grant Likely 
>>
>> Gr.  One might speculate about the reasons why those tidbits are
>> reported missing only after the freeze date.  :-/
>
> Sorry, we have had 3.1 ci packaged kernel builds going for only about
> a week now and the lava submission only started working a couple of
> days ago.  Also the lava kernel testing boots without dt so the bug
> did not show up until I did a manual test today after the release.
>
> --john
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Linaro Kernel October 2011 Release

[John Rigby]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Nicolas Pitre  wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, John Rigby wrote:
>
>> This tree seems to be missing per board dt support so booting with a
>> device tree doesn't seem to work.  Need something like for example
>> this commit that added it for panda in the 3.0 tree:
>>
>> commit d24e9a194c2ed4ca56b8f4e7d96038cd3af3fda8
>> Author: Grant Likely 
>> Date:   Tue Jul 5 23:42:31 2011 -0600
>>
>>     arm/dt: Add Pandaboard devicetree support
>>
>>     Enable basic device tree support on Pandaboard
>>
>>     Signed-off-by: Grant Likely 
>
> Gr.  One might speculate about the reasons why those tidbits are
> reported missing only after the freeze date.  :-/

Sorry, we have had 3.1 ci packaged kernel builds going for only about
a week now and the lava submission only started working a couple of
days ago.  Also the lava kernel testing boots without dt so the bug
did not show up until I did a manual test today after the release.

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Linaro Kernel October 2011 Release

[John Rigby]

This tree seems to be missing per board dt support so booting with a
device tree doesn't seem to work.  Need something like for example
this commit that added it for panda in the 3.0 tree:

commit d24e9a194c2ed4ca56b8f4e7d96038cd3af3fda8
Author: Grant Likely 
Date:   Tue Jul 5 23:42:31 2011 -0600

arm/dt: Add Pandaboard devicetree support

Enable basic device tree support on Pandaboard

Signed-off-by: Grant Likely 

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Preliminary wiki starting page for i.MX53 QuickStart board

[John Rigby]

Until this patchset:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/129800

mx51 and mx53 could not be compiled into kernel together so our
upstream only mx hwpack is mx51 only

We will be able to change that now with these patches.

--john

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Christian Robottom Reis
 wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 03:41:34PM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
>> https://wiki.linaro.org/Boards/MX53QuickStart
>>
>> Sorry guys, although been pushed and pinged several times by various people
>> we are finally able to come up with a preliminary starting page for i.MX53
>> QuickStart board.  It's currently very simple, and hopefully we'll get it
>> more detailed in the future.
>>
>> Feedback is welcome!
>
> Oh, this is excellent. Thanks for putting the effort into the write-up.
> All I need now is an actual board to tell you how well it works ;-)
>
> I had one comment, which is that the "Downloading Hardware Pack" section
> seems to only specify the "lt" variant; does it make sense to also point
> to the pure upstream variant for comparison (or for people that are
> hell-bent on an upstreamable kernel?)
>
The current linux-linaro still has the

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: CFP : Have a Beagle or Beagle XM with a USB wifi?

[John Rigby]

Thanks Robert.

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Robert Nelson  wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Robert Nelson  
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 4:02 PM, John Rigby  wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Robert Nelson  
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Tom Gall  wrote:
>>>>> What we want to do for the next linaro release 11.09 is have working
>>>>> USB wifi support out of the box on beagle/beagle xm with the developer
>>>>> image.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tho you won't have to twist my arm hard at all to include BT in that
>>>>> goal as well Tony :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> We like to keep the developer image as small as possible so the fun
>>>>> part is keeping this to the minimal number of packages to make it
>>>>> work.
>>>>>
>>>>> For wifi I BELIEVE we just need to add wireless-tools.
>>>>>
>>>>> So here's what I'd like you to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Grab the developer rootfs -
>>>>> http://snapshots.linaro.org/11.05-daily/linaro-developer/20110831/0/images/tar/
>>>>> grab the omap3 hwpack -
>>>>> http://snapshots.linaro.org/11.05-daily/linaro-hwpacks/omap3/20110831/0/images/hwpack/
>>>>>
>>>>> Install to sd with linaro-media-create.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you can apt-get install wireless-tools and see if that's enough to
>>>>> get your wifi working. If not what else did you need?
>>>>
>>>> Looks like we need to add the config's for a bunch of usb wifi drivers..
>>>>
>>> Robert, could you send me a list of CONFIGs we should have on for wireless?
>>
>> Will do, just be a sec..
>>
>> BTW, panda also needs this patch, to enable wl12xx regulator (only for
>> 3.0.x, for 3.1-rc's it's moved to twl-common, yet still needs a simlar
>> tweak):
>>
>> 3.0 panda wl12xx regulator patch:
>> (docs) http://elinux.org/Panda_How_to_kernel_3_0_rel
>> (patch) http://elinux.org/images/8/87/0001-omap4-pandaboard-wlan-fix.patch
>
> Hi John,
>
> Here's a list pulled from my stable tree, I have a good pile of random
> wifi adapters, so i've added notes to config options that i've
> personally tested..
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Robert Nelson
> http://www.rcn-ee.com/
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: CFP : Have a Beagle or Beagle XM with a USB wifi?

[John Rigby]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Robert Nelson  wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Tom Gall  wrote:
>> What we want to do for the next linaro release 11.09 is have working
>> USB wifi support out of the box on beagle/beagle xm with the developer
>> image.
>>
>> Tho you won't have to twist my arm hard at all to include BT in that
>> goal as well Tony :-)
>>
>> We like to keep the developer image as small as possible so the fun
>> part is keeping this to the minimal number of packages to make it
>> work.
>>
>> For wifi I BELIEVE we just need to add wireless-tools.
>>
>> So here's what I'd like you to do.
>>
>> Grab the developer rootfs -
>> http://snapshots.linaro.org/11.05-daily/linaro-developer/20110831/0/images/tar/
>> grab the omap3 hwpack -
>> http://snapshots.linaro.org/11.05-daily/linaro-hwpacks/omap3/20110831/0/images/hwpack/
>>
>> Install to sd with linaro-media-create.
>>
>> If you can apt-get install wireless-tools and see if that's enough to
>> get your wifi working. If not what else did you need?
>
> Looks like we need to add the config's for a bunch of usb wifi drivers..
>
Robert, could you send me a list of CONFIGs we should have on for wireless?

Thanks,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: trouble building linux-linaro-3.0-2011.08-0

[John Rigby]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Christian Robottom Reis
 wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 03:03:21PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:42:39AM -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
>> > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 09:54:56PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> > > >   AS      arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o
>> > > > arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S: Assembler messages:
>> > > > arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:127: Error: selected processor does
>> > > > not support requested special purpose register -- `mrs r2,cpsr'
>> > > > arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:134: Error: selected processor does
>> > > > not support requested special purpose register -- `mrs r2,cpsr'
>> > > > arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:136: Error: selected processor does
>> > > > not support requested special purpose register -- `msr cpsr_c,r2'
>> > > > make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o] Error 1
>> > > > make[1]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 2
>> > > > make: *** [uImage] Error 2
>> > [...]
>> > >
>> > > Looks to me like your assembler is broken, or gcc is not properly
>> > > telling it about the actual architecture in use.
>> >
>> > Right. And the original unwind-related missing symbols is a problem
>> > somewhere in configuration land?
>>
>> We should turn on CONFIG_ARM_UNWIND in all the global configs if it's
>> not already on.
>
> Okay. So how does this get done?

Its on my plate.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: trouble building linux-linaro-3.0-2011.08-0

[John Rigby]

On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Nicolas Pitre  wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Aug 2011, John Rigby wrote:
>
>> I'm having trouble building the Thumb2 kernel on, I actually believe
>> this same code worked some time ago before a toolchain update.  There
>> are actually two problems described below.  I get past the first with
>> a config change but don't know how to fix the second one.
>>
> [...]
>>   AS      arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o
>> arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S: Assembler messages:
>> arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:127: Error: selected processor does
>> not support requested special purpose register -- `mrs r2,cpsr'
>> arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:134: Error: selected processor does
>> not support requested special purpose register -- `mrs r2,cpsr'
>> arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:136: Error: selected processor does
>> not support requested special purpose register -- `msr cpsr_c,r2'
>> make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 2
>> make: *** [uImage] Error 2
>>
>> Here is my gcc version:
>>
>> $ arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc --version
>> arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.1-5ubuntu2~ppa1) 4.6.1
>> Copyright (C) 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
>> warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>>
>> And as version:
>> GNU assembler (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.21.52.20110707
>> Copyright 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>> This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of
>> the GNU General Public License version 3 or later.
>> This program has absolutely no warranty.
>> This assembler was configured for a target of `arm-linux-gnueabi'.
>
> Looks to me like your assembler is broken, or gcc is not properly
> telling it about the actual architecture in use.
>
> To confirm, please try this:
>
>        echo -e ".arch armv7-a\n.thumb\nmrs r2, cpsr" | \
>        arm-linux-gnueabi-as - -o /dev/null
>
> If that works then your assembler is fine.  In that case the following
> should fail:
>
>        echo -e ".thumb\nmrs r2, cpsr" | \
>        arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -march=armv7-a -x assembler -o /dev/null -c -
>
> If for some reasons this works too, then the kernel build might be
> wrong.  In that case, see the output of:
>
>        make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- V=1 \
>        arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o
>
> I have:
> arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.5.2-8ubuntu3) 4.5.2
> GNU assembler (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.21.0.20110327
> And that works for me just fine.
>
>
Thanks for the info, just before reading your response I found this
problem in GNU assembler when you say -march=all:

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12698

I have a workaround now by setting in -march=armv7-a in
arch/arm/boot/compressed/Makefile instead of -march=all.

Meanwhile Ricardo is working on a fix to binutils in a ppa.

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Add ARM cpu topology definition

[John Rigby]

>
> Can you please enable these Kconfig options in our configs? By default
> SCHED_MC/SMT expose a /sys interface and are disabled by default (0).
>
> Possible values are:
>
>  0 - No power saving load balance (default value)
>  1 - Fill one thread/core/package first for long running threads
>  2 - Also bias task wakeups to semi-idle cpu package for power savings
>
> See Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu for details.
>
> This will make it easy to turn on for folks that are interested (by writing 2
> to /sys/devices/system/cpu/sched_mc_power_savings)

WIll do.  Sorry for the delay.
>
> Regards,
> Amit
>
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: The Linaro-3.0 kernel branch is now open

[John Rigby]

My first request would be for board level device tree support.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Please tag commits referred to by pinned and release manifests in Android builds

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Ricardo Salveti
 wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Alexander Sack  wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Zach Pfeffer  
>> wrote:
>>> In-order to make reproducible builds we create pinned manifests with
>>> each commit explicitly listed. We also use this method to create a
>>> release. We depend on these pinned commits - if they don't exist the
>>> "released" builds can no longer be reproduced.
>>
>> One amend: the commits need to exist AND need to be reachable through a head.
>>
>> In other words: due to how the repo tool work, tagging and then
>> rebasing will not be good enough.
>
> For me this seems to be quite fragile, as you're expecting the
> upstream tree for a component to not rebase the tree.
>
> At least when looking at what happened with u-boot-linaro, where a
> rebase is expected by the way John is maintaining his tree, this
> method will fail unless you're building against a tag (as I believe
> git will respect the tag even if the tree was rebased in some way).
>
> Is there other way to fix this at the tool instead of forcing the
> component tree owner to not rebase the tree?
>
If I read the prior emails correctly then the commit needs to be
reachable by a head but not necessarily "the" head as in master so I
believe that I can still rebase master (or whatever) as long as
released commits are still accessible from some other head.  So if
each time a release happens a branch is created as well as a tag then
there is no problem other than the noise of having these extra
branches that only exist for keep tags or commits accessible.  Please
someone correct me if I am wrong.

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: problem with todays linux-linaro-2.6.39 and THUMB2 kernel

[John Rigby]

I thought this was new but it has been around for awhile.  My default
config was not turning on THUMB2 kernel so I only saw it today.

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 9:12 AM, John Rigby  wrote:
> Nicolas, Dave,
>
> make omap4_defconfig
> make menuconfig and turn on THUMB2_KERNEL
> make
> .
>  CC      arch/arm/kernel/smp_twd.o
>  CC      arch/arm/kernel/machine_kexec.o
>  AS      arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.o
> arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S: Assembler messages:
> arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:10: Error: invalid offset, value too
> big (0xFFFC)
> arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:11: Error: invalid offset, value too
> big (0xFFFC)
> arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:58: Error: invalid offset, value too
> big (0xFFFC)
> arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:59: Error: invalid offset, value too
> big (0xFFFC)
> make[1]: *** [arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.o] Error 1
> make: *** [arch/arm/kernel] Error 2
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

problem with todays linux-linaro-2.6.39 and THUMB2 kernel

[John Rigby]

Nicolas, Dave,

make omap4_defconfig
make menuconfig and turn on THUMB2_KERNEL
make
.
  CC  arch/arm/kernel/smp_twd.o
  CC  arch/arm/kernel/machine_kexec.o
  AS  arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.o
arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S: Assembler messages:
arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:10: Error: invalid offset, value too
big (0xFFFC)
arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:11: Error: invalid offset, value too
big (0xFFFC)
arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:58: Error: invalid offset, value too
big (0xFFFC)
arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.S:59: Error: invalid offset, value too
big (0xFFFC)
make[1]: *** [arch/arm/kernel/relocate_kernel.o] Error 1
make: *** [arch/arm/kernel] Error 2

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Compiling kernel for panda linaro natty 11.05

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Andy Doan  wrote:
> On 06/21/2011 04:53 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:52:12PM +0530, Amit Mahajan wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 12:14 +0530, Avik Sil wrote:
 > > On Tuesday 21 June 2011 12:06 PM, Amit Mahajan wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have booted panda board using 11.05 natty release of ubuntu. It 
> > > > worked
> > > > great.
> > > >
> > > > Now, I am trying to compile the kernel myself. I am using the 
> > > > sources
> > > > from tarball provided on 11.05 release page as well as from linaro 
> > > > git
> > > > 2.6.38 tree.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have extracted the .config from running ubuntu(of 11.05 LEB) and 
> > > > using
> > > > it to compile my own kernels. Then I am just replacing the uImage on
> > > > sdcard(generated using 11.05 LEB) by my compiled kernel.
> > > >
> > > > Boot process goes fine till the init process but then it fails to 
> > > > bring
> > > > on the graphics and goes to console mode.
> > > >
> > > > Any help on this?
 > >
 > > You may want to install modules on the SD card too:
 > >
 > > make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi-
 > > INSTALL_MOD_PATH=/media/rootfs modules_install
>>> >
>>> > I am getting these errors while building the modules. I have linaro
>>> > gcc-4.5.1. Is it related to older gcc?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   AS      arch/arm/boot/compressed/lib1funcs.o
>>> >   LD      arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux
>>> >   OBJCOPY arch/arm/boot/zImage
>>> >   Kernel: arch/arm/boot/zImage is ready
>>> > ERROR: "__aeabi_uldivmod" [sound/soc/codecs/snd-soc-wm8974.ko]
>>> > undefined!
>>> > ERROR: "__aeabi_uldivmod" [sound/soc/codecs/snd-soc-wm8940.ko]
>>> > undefined!
>>> > ERROR: "__aeabi_uldivmod" [sound/soc/codecs/snd-soc-wm8510.ko]
>>> > undefined!
>>> > WARNING: modpost: Found 2 section mismatch(es).
>>> > To see full details build your kernel with:
>>> > 'make CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y'
>>> > make[1]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>> > make: *** [modules] Error 2
>> John, do you know why the packaged kernel builds don't get these errors?
>
> I think this only happens when cross-compiling
>

I don't see this when cross compiling the packaged kernel.  Perhaps my
toolchain is an older rev?

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: device tree stuff for linaro-2.6.39

[John Rigby]

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Nicolas Pitre  wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, John Rigby wrote:
>
>> Nicolas,
>>
>> Is device tree stuff equivalent to what was in .38 going in?  I'm
>> looking for the equivalent of what went into .38 in commit
>> 3fb7bd037f31f5acdc213c0eb431c07a38803445
>>
>>  Merge branch 'devicetree/arm-linaro-2.6.38' of
>> git://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux-2.6 into linaro-2.6.38
>
> Hmmm... In fact it looks like the machine specific bits are missing.
>
> @Grant: what is the plan for those?  Do you have a branch with them on
> top of what went into 3.0-rc1?

Is this stuff in yet?  Actually I just checked the tree and I don't
see much new in this area but just wanted to make sure I am not
mistaken.

John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: linaro packaged 2.6.39 kernel work in progress

[John Rigby]

This kernel _DOES_ boot.  Other things were causing my problem.

However if you do want to try this kernel with previously created
image with u-boot setup to load a devtree then I believe you will need
to change the boot.scr file to remove the loading of the device tree
since this kernel does not yet have device tree support.

With the sd card inserted and the dos partition mounted on /media/boot:

strings /boot/boot.scr > boot.txt

edit boot.txt and remove the fatload mmc 0:1 0x815f board.dtb;
part of bootcmd

mkimage -A arm -O linux -T script -C none \
-a 0 \
-e 0 \
-n "Ubuntu boot script" \
-d ./boot.txt \
/media/boot/boot.scr

unmount it and try it.



On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 8:45 PM, John Rigby  wrote:
> There is a packaged kernel work in progress here:
> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=ubuntu/linux-linaro-oneiric.git;a=summary
> git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-oneiric.git
>
> It is based on a snapshot of linux-linaro-2.6.39 from today plus sauce
> and packaging from Ubuntu-2.6.39-3.10.
>
> The bad news is that this kernel does not even boot for me.  As I
> chase that down I would like feedback on the new configs.  They are
> dramatically reduced compared to the last cycle.  I created the new
> configs by starting with the upstream defconfigs for each soc and then
> added only what was necessary to satisfy the Ubuntu config enforce
> script.
>
> This is the perfect time in the release process to start over with
> minimal configs since we have time deal with missing options.  So
> please look at the configs and let me know what else should be turned
> on.
>
> The packaged kernel has configs split across multiple files.  Which is
> a little confusing.  Here is a synopsis:
>
> ./debian_linaro/config/config.common.ubuntu is the part that is common
> across all arch's and flavours (socs).
> ./debian_linaro/config/armel/config.common.armel has stuff common
> across all armel flavours but since we only have armel then this file
> is empty with all the common stuff propagating up to
> config.common.ubuntu.
> ./debian/linaro/config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-* contain the soc
> specific stuff.
>
> Any input appreciated.  One obvious thing I have noticed is that the
> soc specific options differ in non-soc specific ways that could be
> made consistent.  For example lots of CONFIG_CRYPTO options are not
> set in mx51 but m or y in omap.  As you see these please give your
> opinion on if all plats should make an these y, m or n.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

linaro packaged 2.6.39 kernel work in progress

[John Rigby]

There is a packaged kernel work in progress here:
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=ubuntu/linux-linaro-oneiric.git;a=summary
git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-oneiric.git

It is based on a snapshot of linux-linaro-2.6.39 from today plus sauce
and packaging from Ubuntu-2.6.39-3.10.

The bad news is that this kernel does not even boot for me.  As I
chase that down I would like feedback on the new configs.  They are
dramatically reduced compared to the last cycle.  I created the new
configs by starting with the upstream defconfigs for each soc and then
added only what was necessary to satisfy the Ubuntu config enforce
script.

This is the perfect time in the release process to start over with
minimal configs since we have time deal with missing options.  So
please look at the configs and let me know what else should be turned
on.

The packaged kernel has configs split across multiple files.  Which is
a little confusing.  Here is a synopsis:

./debian_linaro/config/config.common.ubuntu is the part that is common
across all arch's and flavours (socs).
./debian_linaro/config/armel/config.common.armel has stuff common
across all armel flavours but since we only have armel then this file
is empty with all the common stuff propagating up to
config.common.ubuntu.
./debian/linaro/config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-* contain the soc
specific stuff.

Any input appreciated.  One obvious thing I have noticed is that the
soc specific options differ in non-soc specific ways that could be
made consistent.  For example lots of CONFIG_CRYPTO options are not
set in mx51 but m or y in omap.  As you see these please give your
opinion on if all plats should make an these y, m or n.

Thanks,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

device tree stuff for linaro-2.6.39

[John Rigby]

Nicolas,

Is device tree stuff equivalent to what was in .38 going in?  I'm
looking for the equivalent of what went into .38 in commit
3fb7bd037f31f5acdc213c0eb431c07a38803445

 Merge branch 'devicetree/arm-linaro-2.6.38' of
git://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux-2.6 into linaro-2.6.38

Thanks,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: The linaro-2.6.39 kernel repository is now alive

[John Rigby]

Can you enter a bug for this so I don't forget to make these =y if
that is all it takes to fix this.

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Andy Doan  wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 10:44 AM, John Rigby wrote:
>> I intend to make this better this cycle.  The various flavours will be more
>> consistent with one another and the configs will be much leaner.  Also I have
>> found that one can successfully boot test a kernel with only "make uImage"
>> so you don't have to take the time to build all the module to do a quick boot
>> test.
>
> Slightly off topic - but there's one annoying thing when you just build
> our uImage. The linaro default .config has these options as modules:
>
>        CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_437=m
>        CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_1=m
>
> This means you can't update the kernel on your target device because you
> can't mount /dev/mmcblk0p1. When testing kernel changes, I like to run a
> script on the device that will grab a new uImage, copy it to
> /dev/mmcblk0p1, and reboot.
>
> -andy
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: The linaro-2.6.39 kernel repository is now alive

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 11:31:51AM +0100, Andy Green wrote:
>> On 06/07/2011 10:58 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>>
>> Hi -
>>
>> >>It was the output produced by running the commands listed at
>> >>https://wiki.linaro.org/Resources/HowTo/KernelDeploy#From_Linaro_sources
>> >>
>> >>This config has CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL=y and doesn't have an entry for
>> >>CONFIG_CPU_V6
>>
>> Well it's because that config is coming from outside the tree
>> itself, it can have no relation to what's in the actual HEAD of what
>> you're building.
>>
>> >* The debian.linaro/config/...config.* files from the packaged linaro
>> >kernel tree (at least me, Tixy and the packaged kernel use this)
>> >
>> >* omap2plus_defconfig (omap upstream and some other people use this)
>> >
>> >I'm not sure if there's a correct answer to that one ... but we should
>> >be careful to explain more carefully what config we're using when
>> >discussing kernel problems (I'm guilty of being a bit vague on this...)
>> >
>> >Does anyone have a strong view on which config we should be using?
>>
>> I think folks who are working directly with kernel trees need to use
>> defconfigs coming out of that exact tree and HEAD state.  The reason
>> is that along with patching code, we often patch our reference
>> config that "belongs to the tree", ie, at the patchlevel where a new
>> feature is added to the tree, commonly the reference config is
>> patched as well to enable it.  In my case that's omap4_defconfig but
>> we need to be paying some attention to everything working with
>> upstream's omap2plus_defconfig as well.
>>
>> Folks who are packaging the kernel or wanting to get the same result
>> as a packaged kernel with a different tree can try their previous
>> packaged kernel's config; that's a bit less deterministic in terms
>> of what they will get but it's certainly a legitimate thing to do
>> since in the end most people will consume the kernel in packaged
>> form.
>
> Effectively that's what I've been doing.
>
> The reason for this was that I'd assumed that all defconfigs had
> potentially become stale cruft after all the controversy about them,
> since Linus no longer wanted to see a load of patches to those files.
>
> But now that things have settled down, I guess should be safe
> to assume that consolidated defconfigs which have survived the cull
> are valid and maintained.
>
> omap2plus_defconfig at least is actively used and maintained by
> the upstream omap guys, and should be a fairly good reference.
>
>> However not everyone taking this kernel tree will know about or want
>> to use this external linaro config flavour that lives somewhere
>> completely different.  So the tree ought primarily to work with its
>> own local in-tree reference configs above all else.
>
> That seems fair--- and we don't want to get into a situation where
> the linaro kernel tree is actually broken with the upstream defconfig.
>
> This suggests that for most kernel work done by the kernel WG we
> should test both with the upstream defconfig and the linaro config,
> but treat the upstream defconfig as the primary reference.
>
> It's worth noting that the linaro configs typically enable a _lot_
I intend to make this better this cycle.  The various flavours will be more
consistent with one another and the configs will be much leaner.  Also I have
found that one can successfully boot test a kernel with only "make uImage"
so you don't have to take the time to build all the module to do a quick boot
test.
> more options and modules than the defconfigs, whichi are usually
> rather minimal.  So the linaro configs may provide a better smoketest
> for build problems.
>
> Cheers
> ---Dave
>
> ___
> linaro-kernel mailing list
> linaro-ker...@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-kernel
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: What do we want our hwpack sources

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Christian Robottom Reis  wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 10:33:27PM +0200, Zygmunt Krynicki wrote:
>> One of the things it does not capture currently is kernel
>> configuration. Assuming you can cat /proc/config it would be easy to
>> capture that as well but I would like to know what others think.
>
> James has rightly pointed out that this will be available under /boot,
> right?
>
>> >     - What patches were applied on top of it
>> >         (A URL to the patchset, maybe?)
>>
>> TBD, it's hard to say what those patches were. I would actually like
>> a different solution, have the tree with pre-applied patches (so
>> that we can still pinpoint the tree from git repo) and have a
>> informative description of patches that were applied for other
>> reasons. This would allow us to compare results of tests with and
>> without a specific kernel patch (easy and interesting) withuot
>> resorting to git bisections.
>
> Well, the reason I asked for this was because I had the probably
> erroneous conception that we would have patches applied to the kernel
> that would not be committed to git. I have since reflected that John's
> tree, for instance, already includes any the packaging-related and SAUCE
> patches, so it's not immediately necessary.
>
> However, thinking a bit further, it would be nice to have a reference to
> both the final branch (which the package was generated from) and the
> original, sans-packaging branch which the packaging branch added to.
> However, does this separation exist for all hwpacks? Do Landing Teams
> maintain separate packaging branches, or do you, John?
Landing Teams do their own packaging.
> --
> Christian Robottom Reis   | [+55] 16 9112 6430 | http://launchpad.net/~kiko
> Linaro Engineering VP     | [ +1] 612 216 4935 | http://async.com.br/~kiko
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: The linaro-2.6.39 kernel repository is now alive

[John Rigby]

I noticed all the fine AndyDoan/Ricardo fixes that make panda
wonderful are missing.  My question now is should that stuff go back
in or should we plan on a LT/BSP kernel for full functionality.  I
presume if those patches were headed upstream they would be headed
upstream:).  If not they they should not be in linux-linaro.

On the config issue, I am going to strip down the omap config to be
closer to the others.  I want to make the different flavours more
consistant with one another and the default kernel configs.  I intend
to only turn on stuff required to be "Ubuntu".  Once I have something
we will test and see if anyone notices stuff missing (like a parallel
port driver:).

John

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Andy Doan  wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 12:12 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>
>> This will continue to evolve as this is just the beginning for that
>> tree, so more stuff will be merged.  Only smoke tested on a Dove board,
>> and compile tested for OMAP so far.
>>
>
> I just tried some testing of my Overo with the omap2plus_defconfig and
> my hack for what John Rigby uses for Linaro builds.
>
> The "Linaro config" produces a compiler error. I'm assuming the config
> will be changing, so I haven't really looked into patching the issue.
> John - let me know if this is something you need my help with.
>
> The omap2plus_defconfig comes up but I'm not getting DVI video and I'm
> also seeing these problems from the kernel:
>
> Uncompressing Linux... done, booting the kernel.
> [    0.00] Linux version 2.6.39-00910-g3818181-dirty
> (doanac@storage) (gcc version 4.5.2 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.5.2-8ubuntu3) ) #4
> SMP Thu Jun 2 14:43:32 CDT 2011
> [    0.00] CPU: ARMv7 Processor [411fc083] revision 3 (ARMv7),
> cr=10c53c7f
> [    0.00] CPU: VIPT nonaliasing data cache, VIPT nonaliasing
> instruction cache
> [    0.00] Machine: Gumstix Overo
> [    0.00] Reserving 12582912 bytes SDRAM for VRAM
> [    0.00] Memory policy: ECC disabled, Data cache writeback
> [    0.00] OMAP3430/3530 ES3.1 (l2cache iva sgx neon isp )
> [    0.00] SRAM: Mapped pa 0x4020 to va 0xfe40 size: 0x1
> [    0.00] Clocking rate (Crystal/Core/MPU): 26.0/332/500 MHz
> [    0.00] Reprogramming SDRC clock to 33200 Hz
> [    0.00] PERCPU: Embedded 7 pages/cpu @c0f85000 s8160 r8192 d12320
> u32768
> [    0.00] Built 1 zonelists in Zone order, mobility grouping on.
> Total pages: 126976
> [    0.00] Kernel command line: console=ttyO2,115200n8 mpurate=720
> vram=12M omapfb.mode=dvi:1024x768MR-16@60 omapfb.debug=y
> omapdss.def_disp=dvi root=/dev/mmcblk0p2 rw rootfstype=ext3 rootwait
>
> 
>
> [    0.228179] Registering NAND on CS0
> [    0.231536] Could not obtain gpio for TS PenDown: -16
> [    0.231567] kobject (c05eae78): tried to init an initialized object,
> something is seriously wrong.
> [    0.231628] [] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xe0) from
> [] (kobject_init+0x34/0x90)
> [    0.231689] [] (kobject_init+0x34/0x90) from []
> (device_initialize+0x20/0x90)
> [    0.231719] [] (device_initialize+0x20/0x90) from
> [] (platform_device_register+0x10/0x1c)
> [    0.231781] [] (platform_device_register+0x10/0x1c) from
> [] (overo_init+0x80/0x228)
> [    0.231811] [] (overo_init+0x80/0x228) from []
> (customize_machine+0x1c/0x28)
> [    0.231872] [] (customize_machine+0x1c/0x28) from
> [] (do_one_initcall+0x90/0x164)
> [    0.231903] [] (do_one_initcall+0x90/0x164) from
> [] (kernel_init+0xa4/0x154)
> [    0.231933] [] (kernel_init+0xa4/0x154) from []
> (kernel_thread_exit+0x0/0x8)
> [    0.232055] [ cut here ]
> [    0.232086] WARNING: at
> /home/doanac/linaro/code/linux-linaro-2.6.39/fs/sysfs/dir.c:455
> sysfs_add_one+0x6c/0x94()
> [    0.232116] sysfs: cannot create duplicate filename
> '/devices/platform/reg-fixed-voltage.1'
> [    0.232116] Modules linked in:
> [    0.232177] [] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xe0) from
> [] (warn_slowpath_common+0x4c/0x64)
> [    0.232208] [] (warn_slowpath_common+0x4c/0x64) from
> [] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x2c/0x3c)
> [    0.232269] [] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x2c/0x3c) from
> [] (sysfs_add_one+0x6c/0x94)
> [    0.232299] [] (sysfs_add_one+0x6c/0x94) from []
> (create_dir+0x5c/0xb4)
> [    0.232330] [] (create_dir+0x5c/0xb4) from []
> (sysfs_create_dir+0xa4/0xbc)
> [    0.232360] [] (sysfs_create_dir+0xa4/0xbc) from
> [] (kobject_add_internal+0xd0/0x1e8)
> [    0.232421] [] (kobject_add_internal+0xd0/0x1e8) from
> [] (kobject_add+0x68/0x8c)
> [    0.232452] [] (kobject_add+0x68/0x8c) from []
> (device_add+0xa0/0x50c)
> [    0.232482] [] (device_add+0xa0/0x50c) from []
> (platform_device_add+0x108/0x164)
> [    0.232543] 

Re: What do we want our hwpack sources

[John Rigby]

Speaking about Ubuntu packaged kernels only...

Everything that goes into the source package is in git.
Every release has a signed tag.
Ubuntu kernel package names have a strict naming convention that makes
upgrading and abi checking work right, so from my perspective putting
the tag name somewhere in the binary package is much more realistic
than forcing a new naming convention on the package name.
Kernel image packages have the config used to generate them in /boot
we could easily add another file that contained the git tag.
We could also put a git log from a known upstream Linus or stable
release in there but that log could be long.  It would have all the
linaro patches plus all the Ubuntu patches.

john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: OMAP3 IGEPv2: kworker/0:0:1030 blocked on latest snapshots

[John Rigby]

On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Tom Gall  wrote:
> I've also seen it on my beagle Xm from time to time. Agree, be nice to
> figure out who is
> blocked and why.
>
ok, its not the wireless driver mishaving then

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: OMAP3 IGEPv2: kworker/0:0:1030 blocked on latest snapshots

[John Rigby]

I have only seen this with the wireless problem already noted.  Can
you see if blacklisting the wireless driver fixes the problem?

echo blacklist wl12xx_sdio > /etc/modeprobe.d/blacklist-wireless.conf
reboot


On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Christian Robottom Reis
 wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>    I'm playing around with the latest snapshots on my IGEPv2 and I'm
> seeing a recurring message posted to the console while using it:
>
>    [ 1561.340942] INFO: task kworker/0:0:1030 blocked for more than 120
>        seconds.
>    [ 1561.350860] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs"
>        disables this message.
>    [ 1681.356597] INFO: task kworker/0:0:1030 blocked for more than 120
>        seconds.
>    [ 1681.367187] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs"
>        disables this message.
>
>    root@linaro:~# uname -a
>    Linux linaro 2.6.38-1002-linaro-omap #3-Ubuntu SMP Fri Apr 15 14:00:54
>        UTC 2011 armv7l armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux
>
> I'd like to find out what that task is meant to be doing and why it is
> getting blocked. I haven't been able to notice anything negative in my
> use of the system (downloading and installing packages, editing files,
> running cpuburn and stress).
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Christian Robottom Reis   | [+55 16] 3376 0125 | http://launchpad.net/~kiko
> Canonical Ltd.            | [+55 16] 9112 6430 | http://async.com.br/~kiko
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: approaching a final kernel for 11.05

[John Rigby]

This is the same problem that marcin and I have seen.  See
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-linaro-omap/+bug/785739
the desktop starts fine for Marcin but I have seen it not start the
desktop at all sometimes, it is erratic.

If I remove 
/lib/modules/2.6.38-1003-linaro-omap/kernel/drivers/net/wireless/wl12*
everything else works.

On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jaswinder Singh
 wrote:
> On 19 May 2011 00:01, John Rigby  wrote:
>> Thanks to the heroic efforts of rsalveti the packaged
>> linux-linaro-omap kernel now greatly improved omap4 display
>> functionality.  There is a .deb in the linaro-maintainers kernel ppa.
>> If you have a panda board and have time to try it out your feedback
>> would be much appreciated:
>>
>> https://launchpad.net/~linaro-maintainers/+archive/kernel/+files/linux-image-2.6.38-1003-linaro-omap_2.6.38-1003.4~ppa2_armel.deb
>>
>
> Seems I am overlooking something, when others have reported success.
>
> I am facing problems using it. To be sure I also checked with today's 
> snapshots
> linaro-n-ubuntu-desktop-tar-20110521-0.tar.gz +
> hwpack_linaro-panda_20110521-0_armel_supported.tar.gz
>
> Installed 1003 release with
>
> a)    root@linaro:~#  dpkg -i
> linux-image-2.6.38-1003-linaro-omap_2.6.38-1003.4~ppa2_armel.deb
> b) Created uImage and uInitrd in boot partition using mkimage
>
> I could see Unity frozen over DVI port, though with resolution finer
> than before.
> Nothing when booted HDMI connected.
> Mine is 1920x1080 ASUS laptop.
>
> FWIW,  Ubuntu-11.04 natty armel release works fine at 1080.
>
> Thanks,
> -Jassi
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

approaching a final kernel for 11.05

[John Rigby]

Thanks to the heroic efforts of rsalveti the packaged
linux-linaro-omap kernel now greatly improved omap4 display
functionality.  There is a .deb in the linaro-maintainers kernel ppa.
If you have a panda board and have time to try it out your feedback
would be much appreciated:

https://launchpad.net/~linaro-maintainers/+archive/kernel/+files/linux-image-2.6.38-1003-linaro-omap_2.6.38-1003.4~ppa2_armel.deb

--john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

another packaged kernel blueprint

[John Rigby]

Scott,

It would be nice to have some landing team folks subscribe to

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/linaro-platforms-o-kernel-leb-process

I believe we have had some chaos at the end of both release cycles so
far with trying to add additional features to the packaged kernel.  It
would be nice if we could make it a little less painful next time
around.

Thanks,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: CALL FOR TESTING: proposed enhancements for OMAP4

[John Rigby]

Thanks to Ricardo I have created a packaged version of a merge of the
master and testing branches.

http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/jcrigby/linux-linaro-packaged-next-wip.git

the bare kernel plus some fixes are in the "panda_no_packaging" the
"master" branch has normal packaging added.

It currently has no video on omap3.

John


On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Nicolas Pitre  wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011, John Rigby wrote:
>
>> Is the plan to include the "testing" branch for this cycle?
>
> I'd like to have confirmation that it doesn't break OMAP3 first.  The
> OMAP4 support in that branch comes from sources that have expressed in
> the past that OMAP3 could be broken as a result.
>
>
> Nicolas
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

build error with latest linux-linaro-2.6.38

[John Rigby]

Hi Nicolas,

make omap2plus_defconfig
then
edit .config and remove CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2=y line
then
make oldconfig and turn on CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL

then make uImage

  LD  vmlinux
  SYSMAP  System.map
  SYSMAP  .tmp_System.map
  OBJCOPY arch/arm/boot/Image
  Kernel: arch/arm/boot/Image is ready
  AS  arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o
  GZIParch/arm/boot/compressed/piggy.gzip
  CC  arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o
  CC  arch/arm/boot/compressed/decompress.o
arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S: Assembler messages:
arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:232: Error: r15 not allowed here -- `cmp r10,pc'
make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
make[1]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 2
make: *** [uImage] Error 2

-- john

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: what new CONFIG_s need to be enabled

[John Rigby]

Ok, thanks.

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Nicolas Pitre  wrote:
> On Mon, 2 May 2011, John Rigby wrote:
>
>> Nicolas, Andy,
>>
>> I see that Andy's stuff went into linux-linaro-2.6.38 earlier.  What
>> new CONFIG_'s do I need to turn on in the packaged kernel to ensure we
>> get all the fabulous new stuff enabled?
>
> All that is really new is the wl12xx wireless driver (CONFIG_WL12XX).
> This doesn't include the other stuff that Andy worked on yet.
>
>
> Nicolas
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

what new CONFIG_s need to be enabled

[John Rigby]

Nicolas, Andy,

I see that Andy's stuff went into linux-linaro-2.6.38 earlier.  What
new CONFIG_'s do I need to turn on in the packaged kernel to ensure we
get all the fabulous new stuff enabled?

Thanks,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: CALL FOR TESTING: proposed enhancements for OMAP4

[John Rigby]

Is the plan to include the "testing" branch for this cycle?

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Nicolas Pitre
 wrote:
> Andy Green has worked on a set of patches adding many features to OMAP4
> such as HDMI audio/video, FM receiver, etc.  Before I merge that into
> the Linaro kernel tree I need some assurance that this won't break
> existing OMAP3 support, especially video.  The branch is available in
> the linux-linaro-2.6.38 Git repository on git.linaro.org, in the
> "testing" branch.
>
> So please if you have an OMAP3 board and can perform some testing that
> would be appreciated.
>
>
> Nicolas
>
> ___
> linaro-kernel mailing list
> linaro-ker...@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-kernel
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: u8500 does not build in current linux-linaro-2.6.38/master

[John Rigby]

Thanks!

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Nicolas Pitre  wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2011, John Rigby wrote:
>
>> Not sure who to send this to so including Nicolas and Linus.
>>
>> make u8500_defconfig
>> make uImage
>>
>> produces some undefined reference errors.  Tail of the build log attached.
>
> Grr...
>
> You may revert commit 925f6039 "ARM: zImage: fix issues with missing GOT
> entries for some global variables" for now.  A better fix will be
> required.  All that would be affected is the ability to append a DTB to
> zImage, but the needed patch for that is not in my tree, and the Linaro
> installer doesn't rely on this either.
>
>
> Nicolas
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

u8500 does not build in current linux-linaro-2.6.38/master

[John Rigby]

Not sure who to send this to so including Nicolas and Linus.

make u8500_defconfig
make uImage

produces some undefined reference errors.  Tail of the build log attached.

Thanks,
John
  CHK include/linux/version.h
  CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h
make[1]: `include/generated/mach-types.h' is up to date.
  CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh
  CHK include/generated/compile.h
  Kernel: arch/arm/boot/Image is ready
  SHIPPED arch/arm/boot/compressed/lib1funcs.S
  AS  arch/arm/boot/compressed/lib1funcs.o
  LD  arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `valid_user_regs':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/ptrace.h:189:
 undefined reference to `elf_hwcap'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `outer_inv_range':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/outercache.h:46:
 undefined reference to `outer_cache'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `outer_clean_range':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/outercache.h:51:
 undefined reference to `outer_cache'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `outer_flush_range':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/outercache.h:56:
 undefined reference to `outer_cache'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `outer_flush_all':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/outercache.h:62:
 undefined reference to `outer_cache'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `outer_inv_all':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/outercache.h:68:
 undefined reference to `outer_cache'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o:/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/outercache.h:74:
 more undefined references to `outer_cache' follow
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `__xchg':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h:334:
 undefined reference to `__bad_xchg'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `__cmpxchg_local_generic':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/include/asm-generic/cmpxchg-local.h:22:
 undefined reference to `wrong_size_cmpxchg'
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/include/asm-generic/cmpxchg-local.h:43:
 undefined reference to `wrong_size_cmpxchg'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `__cmpxchg':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h:422:
 undefined reference to `__bad_cmpxchg'
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h:422:
 undefined reference to `__bad_cmpxchg'
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h:422:
 undefined reference to `__bad_cmpxchg'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `dbx500_partnumber':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/mach-ux500/include/mach/id.h:28:
 undefined reference to `dbx500_id'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `dbx500_revision':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/mach-ux500/include/mach/id.h:33:
 undefined reference to `dbx500_id'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `cpu_is_u8500':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/mach-ux500/include/mach/id.h:42:
 undefined reference to `dbx500_id'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `cpu_is_u5500':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/mach-ux500/include/mach/id.h:47:
 undefined reference to `dbx500_id'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o: In function `cpu_is_u8500ed':
/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/mach-ux500/include/mach/id.h:56:
 undefined reference to `dbx500_id'
arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o:/home/jcrigby/work/git-trees/linaro-natty/linaro-natty/arch/arm/mach-ux500/include/mach/id.h:61:
 more undefined references to `dbx500_id' follow
make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 1
make[1]: *** [arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 2
make: *** [uImage] Error 2
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Mainlining android fastboot support to upstream u-boot

[John Rigby]

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Wolfgang Denk  wrote:
> Dear John Rigby,
>
> In message  you wrote:
>>
>> So Wolfgang,  let's assume that Fastboot could coexist with and share
>> code with the DFU implementation.  Would that be more acceptable?  Or
>
> It is always nice if features can share common code, but here this is
> actually completely unrelated to the question I raised.
>
>> is any effort to get Fastboot into mainline just a waste of time?
>
> The basic rule is that we accept what is useful for some (even if a
> few), unless it hurts others (including maintainers).
>
>> What additional info is needed to answer that question?
>
> I wrote this in my initial posting to the Linaro list, and explicitly
> pointed you to it before, see
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.linaro.devel/3823/focus=3842
> and especially
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/98145/focus=98283
>
> I don't want to talk about code before we have heard anything about
> the design.  This may be a trivial thing for you after having used
> this for some amount of time, but please consider the mental welfare
> of the  persons who never heard about this before, and who will
> probably have to maintain the code after you.
Ok, I had already read both of those posts and when I read "design" I
was thinking that Android Fastboot exists and the feature list is
already set as is the wire protocol, so I don't see that we have a lot
of flexibility in those areas.  The only design I see that is up for
definition is how it can be implemented in U-Boot, that was why I
brought up sharing with DFU.

I will follow up in a separate email with summary design docs of what
fastboot is including what the wire protocol is and what services it
needs from the environment it is running in.  Along with this I will
have pointers to more detailed docs.

Does that sound reasonable?

Thanks for your patience,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Mainlining android fastboot support to upstream u-boot

[John Rigby]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Zach Pfeffer  wrote:
>>> So, "Google uses it aside", it seems that being able to boot via USB
>>> is a useful thing and fastboot is a particular solution; I'm not
>>> entirely sure what other USB u-boot extensions exist apart from those
>>
>> Well, DFU support is a standard solution, and the LF / CELF has just
>> recently assigned resources to adapt the existingout-of-tree port for
>> mainline U-boot.
>
> Perhaps John and the LF /CELF resource could work together so both DFU
> and fastboot would work?
So Wolfgang,  let's assume that Fastboot could coexist with and share
code with the DFU implementation.  Would that be more acceptable?  Or
is any effort to get Fastboot into mainline just a waste of time?
What additional info is needed to answer that question?

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: CALL FOR TESTING: proposed enhancements for OMAP4

[John Rigby]

Nicolas, Andy:

I noticed this commit:

This introduces a defconfig version of Sebastien Jan's reference
config for Panda.

To use the defconfig, you need to use the following scheme to
expand it back to being a full config

 make ARCH=arm defconfig
 cat arch/arm/configs/omap4_defconfig >>.config
 make ARCH=arm oldnoconfig

>From Seb Jan about the original reference config -->

Note on OMAP3 based boards:
Deactivate OMAP3 based boards since their support has not been
integrated (some boards would not build).
Keep OMAP3 and ARCH_3430 because OMAP4 support is not yet properly
supported by configuration and dependencies (ex: v4l2, DSI)

Does that mean that with this tree we cannot have a single omap[34] kernel?

Thanks,
John

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Nicolas Pitre
 wrote:
> Andy Green has worked on a set of patches adding many features to OMAP4
> such as HDMI audio/video, FM receiver, etc.  Before I merge that into
> the Linaro kernel tree I need some assurance that this won't break
> existing OMAP3 support, especially video.  The branch is available in
> the linux-linaro-2.6.38 Git repository on git.linaro.org, in the
> "testing" branch.
>
> So please if you have an OMAP3 board and can perform some testing that
> would be appreciated.
>
>
> Nicolas
>
> ___
> linaro-kernel mailing list
> linaro-ker...@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-kernel
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Mainlining android fastboot support to upstream u-boot

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Wolfgang Denk  wrote:
> Dear Jim Huang,
>
> In message  you wrote:
>>
>> My idea is that we require abstract 'bootloader' component in Android
>> device/linaro/common, and (patched) 'u-boot' would be the provider of
>> 'bootloader' component in
>> device/linaro/Linaro-Evaluation-Build-Hardware.  Also, supporting
>
> If you are discussing requirements for U-Boot, and plan to get these
> merged in to mainlineU-Boot one day, it would probably be a good idea
> to discuss these plans on the U-Boot mailing list as well - ideally
> before any design is cast in iron.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>
> --
> DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
> HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
> Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
> The management question ... is not _whether_ to build a pilot  system
> and  throw  it away. You _will_ do that. The only question is whether
> to plan in advance to build a throwaway, or to promise to deliver the
> throwaway to customers.       - Fred Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

Wolfgang,

As you can see from this discussion, Linaro is considering applying
resources (probably me) to upstreaming Android Fastboot features into
mainline u-boot.  What suggestions do you have for making this process
as painless as possible?

The topic came up briefly here last year:
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-August/076343.html

An implementation exists for omap4/panda on gitorious:
git://gitorious.org/pandaboard/u-boot.git in the omap4_panda_es2.0
branch.  There is also a version for omap3 somewhere else on
gitorious.

To bring this to mainline one would have to:

1) Bring code up to current mainline revision.
2) Fix any coding standards issues.
3) Document the new features.

What else?  I know one issue maybe why does this need to exist when
other solutions exist.  I think that since Android uses it, it is
somewhat of a de facto standard.

All comments welcome,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [Android: device/linaro/common] Rename the kernel to uImage for Linaro Android build

[John Rigby]

Thanks for the links Zach.

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Zach Pfeffer  wrote:
> John,
>
> I pulled the tree from:
>
> source: git://gitorious.org/pandaboard/u-boot.git
> branch: origin/omap4_panda_es2.0
> board config: omap4430panda_config
>
> (referenced http://omappedia.org/wiki/OMAP_Pandroid_Main#Getting_Started)
>
> -Zach
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Alexander Sack  wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Zach Pfeffer  wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 8:05 AM, Alexander Sack  wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Zach Pfeffer  wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:46 AM, Jim Huang  wrote:
>>>>>> On 18 April 2011 14:40,   wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Patrik Ryd 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the Linaro set up u-boot will look for uImage (and not for kernel).
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>  tasks/kernel.mk |    4 ++--
>>>>>>>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hi Patrik,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this imply that we requires u-boot as necessary support for common 
>>>>>> LEB?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not sure if we should introduce an abstract provider for kernel
>>>>>> image, but I prefer to specify in board configurations since we might
>>>>>> migrate to other 'fastboot' compatible boot loader implementations
>>>>>> such as lk (little kernel) used in Qualcomm patform.
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't gotten into lk too much (used it and the legacy fastboot),
>>>>> but it seems that sticking with u-boot may be a better approach since
>>>>> it has wider community support and better cross-platform support. Was
>>>>> there a specific reason to move to lk?
>>>>
>>>> I am happy to have a discussion about our default android bootloader
>>>> at LDS in budapest.
>>>>
>>>> IIRC, one blueprint that John Rigby wanted to own is about adding
>>>> fastboot support to u-boot ... maybe thats a good compromise instead
>>>> of lk?
>>>
>>> That would be very nice. There's actually some documentation in u-boot
>>> about fastboot (a README). I wonder if there's some support already?
>>
>> Yes, I was told that someone (TI?) had a public tree with it. If all
>> goes well, John (CCed) would review those, clean the patches up,
>> upstream and integrate then into our u-boot branches so we can have
>> them for our LEB builds as well.
>>
>> --
>>
>>  - Alexander
>>
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Samsung: CPUIDLE Support

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Amit Kachhap  wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Following macros can be enabled,
> CONFIG_CPU_IDLE,
> CONFIG_PM,
> CONFIG_PM_DEBUG
Currently fails to compile with CONFIG_PM on.
>
> Thanks,
> Amit Daniel
>
>
>
> On 11 April 2011 10:52, John Rigby  wrote:
>>
>> Amitk, So can I turn on all the CONFIG_PM* stuff for samsung now?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Nicolas Pitre 
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Amit Kachhap wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Nicolas,
>> >>
>> >> I could not find this changes in the latest 2.6.38 Linaro kernel.
>> >> Please
>> >> merge the patch from the below
>> >> mentioned samsung maintainers next link as this is required for the PM
>> >> Linaro release.
>> >
>> > It is merged now.
>> >
>> >
>> > Nicolas
>> >
>> > ___
>> > linaro-dev mailing list
>> > linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
>> > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>> >
>
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Samsung: CPUIDLE Support

[John Rigby]

Amitk, So can I turn on all the CONFIG_PM* stuff for samsung now?



On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Nicolas Pitre  wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Amit Kachhap wrote:
>
>> Hi Nicolas,
>>
>> I could not find this changes in the latest 2.6.38 Linaro kernel. Please
>> merge the patch from the below
>> mentioned samsung maintainers next link as this is required for the PM
>> Linaro release.
>
> It is merged now.
>
>
> Nicolas
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: git merge question

[John Rigby]

git rebase -i is a god send if you find yourself needing to rebase
often and it get even better when you learn about git rerere (google
it)


On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Tixy  wrote:
>> On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 10:16 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
>>> one reason why my understanding of the actual problem here was a bit
>>> patchy.
>>
>>  :-)
>
> _not_ intentional! (if you believe me)
>
> Anyway ... interactive rebase solved my problem relatively painlessly
> -- thanks nico.
>
> Cheers
> ---Dave
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: OMAP4 MPU DVFS patches

[John Rigby]

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Andy Green  wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 09:24 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>>
>> I have the same problem.  If I turn off the display then the board boots.
>>
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-linaro-omap/+bug/752900
>>
>> Thanks to John Stultz for making the connection that the hang was just as
>> the display gets set up on a successful boot.
>>
>> Kernel config and boot logs are attached to the bug.
>
> There are a couple of config options at least that deceptively offer things
> which only break boot.
>
> Since there's no relationship between configs people are using and the one
> Panda stuff is getting heavily tested on (arch/arm/configs/omap4_defconfig
> on Seb's and my tree), I am thinking we should maybe take an assertive
> approach about it -->
>
> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/andygreen/kernel-tilt.git;a=patch;h=9456c5c15a4d4e4304d6028aabb706712e608b21
> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/andygreen/kernel-tilt.git;a=patch;h=d0fd507e52d7ff862ad7f9d0761038dc627d5bec


Thanks Andy.  This fixes the problem.  These will be in the next
packaged kernel. I added these two links to the bug as well.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: OMAP4 MPU DVFS patches

[John Rigby]

I have the same problem.  If I turn off the display then the board boots.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-linaro-omap/+bug/752900

Thanks to John Stultz for making the connection that the hang was just as
the display gets set up on a successful boot.

Kernel config and boot logs are attached to the bug.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 12:12 AM, john stultz  wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 17:49 -0700, john stultz wrote:
>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 21:03 +0530, Vishwanath Sripathy wrote:
>> > Hi Nicolas,
>> >
>> > Pls find rebased OMAP DVFS patches attached. Apologies for the delay
>> > as I had to rework some of the patches because of kernel migration.
>>
>> I think something in the DVFS patch set broke usb on Pandaboard.
>
> Bah. Maybe not. Trying to reproduce it doesn't seem to work. Might be
> some sort of transient .config settings issue, but I didn't save off the
> problematic .config. So I'll try to reproduce this some tomorrow, but
> until then I'd not worry about it.
>
> thanks
> -john
>
>
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: OMAP4 MPU DVFS patches

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Vishwanath Sripathy
 wrote:
> Yes, Following options have to be enabled in the defconfig to enable cpufreq.
>
> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=y
> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE=y
> CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX=y
> CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX_CLASS3=y
Done
>
> Vishwa
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Amit Kucheria  
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 6:21 AM, Nicolas Pitre  
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Vishwanath Sripathy wrote:
>>>
 Hi Nicolas,

 Pls find rebased OMAP DVFS patches attached. Apologies for the delay
 as I had to rework some of the patches because of kernel migration.
>>>
>>> No problem.
>>>
>>> Merged, thanks.
>>>
>>
>> Vishwa,
>>
>> Could you also make sure that that DVFS config options are enabled in
>> the Linaro configs? If you could state the config options, John
>> (cc'ed) could help you with enabling them.
>> Linaro does not use the omap2plug_defconfig
>>
>> /Amit
>>
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Status of the linaro-2.6.38 kernel

[John Rigby]

The rebuilt branch is fine for me.  My tree creation methodology is
patterned after the Ubuntu kernel which means I rebase to new
upstreams each release so I don't mind if my upstreams do as well.

John

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Nicolas Pitre
 wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> As I've been working on the integration of the latest developments and
> fixes from upstream into the linaro-2.6.38 kernel lately, it became
> quickly evident that major merge conflicts were to be expected.  The
> problem stems from the fact that we opened the 2.6.38 branch early i.e.
> around the 2.6.38-rc5 kernel.  Many patches that were merged into the
> Linaro kernel have been subsequently modified by their respective
> maintainers until they were merged upstream, meaning that what we have
> now in mainline is different from what the Linaro kernel tree has.  This
> creates several issues:
>
>  - It is hard to verify that what is in the Linaro tree is actually the
>   latest and the best version of a patch.
>
>  - Merging additional fixes from upstream often ends up in merge
>   conflicts requiring manual resolution, sometimes non-trivial ones,
>   which is in itself a bug hazard.
>
>  - People wanting to contribute patches to the Linaro kernel potentially
>   have to create a different patch than what they would submit
>   upstream.
>
> Given those issues, I decided to rebuild the linaro-2.6.38 branch from
> scratch to see where that would bring me.  And as could be expected, the
> result looks nicer and it is much easier to work with than the current
> tree.  For example, this allowed me to merge the latest OMAP support
> from mainline as is, including the latest fixes, without any need for
> backport work nor major conflict resolution.  Another advantage is that
> the commit SHA1 references are now identical in most cases to what can
> be found into mainline.
>
> So... my question is: should we switch to this rebuilt tree or not?
> There are drawbacks with such a move of course:
>
>  - All the testing done so far would be void.  This is however not as
>   bad as this may look as the rebuilt kernel contains fixes for existing
>   bugs in the current tree, and the rebuilt kernel is using patches
>   that have and still are being tested by a wider community.
>
>  - I didn't forward port a couple series of patches that are available
>   in the current Linaro tree and not in mainline yet, including:
>    * DT support (Grant Likely)
>    * DVFS and PM for OMAP (Vishwanath Sripathy, Vishwanath BS)
>    * Some ux500 fixups (Linus Walleij)
>    * clock debug information (Yong Shen)
>    * Samsung CPUIDLE (Amit Kachhap)
>   So I would prefer if the people responsible for those patches did
>   resubmit their patches once they apply to the new tree (that should
>   be even easier now to apply patches that were meant for mainline).
>
>  - The history of the rebuilt tree is obviously different from the
>   current tree's.  This means special care when updating to the new
>   tree with Git.
>
> But overall I think there are more advantages than disadvantages for
> such a move.  What other people think?
>
> The current rebuilt tree can be seen at:
>
> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=kernel/linux-linaro-2.6.38.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/rebuilt
>
> or obtained from:
>
> git://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-2.6.38.git (the "rebuilt" branch)
>
>
> Nicolas
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Device Tree on ARM status report - Mar 20

[John Rigby]

FDT support is in both so stick with stable.  It is only enabled for
beagle.  Search of FDT in include/config/omap3_beagle.h to see how to
turn it on for other boards.

If we want this turned on for other boards let me know which ones.

John

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Grant Likely  wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 09:58:58AM +, Tixy wrote:
>> Hi Grant
>>
>> On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 03:25 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>> > For each board, I need an engineer to do the following:
>> >
>> > 1) Enable CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT and CONFIG_SYS_BOOTMAPSZ against the Linaro
>> > u-boot tree.
>>
>> Which tree should I use, u-boot-linaro-stable or u-boot-linaro-next ?
>
> John Rigby would know better, but I suspect u-boot-linaro-next is the one to 
> use.
>
> John, which tree should be used for targetting Natty?
>
> g.
>
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: How do you see a patch series?

[John Rigby]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Peter Maydell
 wrote:
> On 22 March 2011 16:56, Andy Doan  wrote:
>> On 03/22/2011 08:05 AM, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
>>> That's to decide whether we should count the patches that belong to a
>>> series individually or not.
>>>
>>
>> Could you generate two sets of stats like "Total Patches Per Author" and
>> "Total Patch-Series Per Author" or possibly try and give more weight to
>> a patch series based on the number of individual patches?
>>
>> Trying to count say my one-line patch to fix a build break in x-loader
>> to a patch series like "device tree support" doesn't seem fair.
>
> We could count number of lines changed as well :-)
I believe the scripts that Greg KH and Jonathan Corbet use for kernel
development tracking do that.
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/kernel_history/
>
> -- PMM
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

patch for bug 725252

[John Rigby]

This patch looks pretty safe.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=130045643531514&w=3

The bug is not critical but produces a lengthy kernel warning message
that may be alarming to some users.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

a different fix for panda hang

[John Rigby]

Nicolas,

Today hrw pointed out this patch.  It seems to be the proper fix for
the panda hang.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=130021624629574&w=2

John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [PATCH 00/12][RFC] Intial Kconfig Fragment Demo

[John Rigby]

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Andy Green  wrote:
>> On 03/09/2011 09:04 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>>
 I take it this magic of SMP or not is hidden in this config layering
 scheme
 you mentioned and it isn't really using the same config for say igep0020
 and
>>>
>>> No, it is in the black depths of ARM assembly and TBH, it is voodoo to
>>> me. Nothing to do with kernel config as such. The SMP kernel, at
>>> runtime, (binary) patches itself to convert locking primitives to
>>> no-ops in the UP case. Or something to the effect.
>>
>> Hum my IGEP0020 config here has CONFIG_BROKEN_ON_SMP=y set so I guess this
>> is to do with what you mentioned.
>>
 Panda.  In any event, there's a performance tradeoff running SMP kernel
 on
 uniprocessor to consider too.
>>>
>>> Apparently, with this one-time patching (per boot) there isn't such a
>>> tradeoff.
>>
>> OK thanks for the explanation.
>
> SMP-on-UP appears to be fully working nowadays.  We currently don't
> build a single SMP kernel for omap4 and omap3, but I've been playing
> with that and it's been shown to work.  Does anyone know whether we're
> planning to move to a single OMAP kernel?  Has anyone measured the
> performance delta?

linux-linaro-omap runs on omap[34] and has for most of this cycle.
Currently CONFIG_SMP and CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP are both on.

OMAP4 has had some glitches, first no display then broken display.
The next release has display with blue text just like the Ubuntu
kernel:).  Since linux-linaro-omap is based on upstream or headed
upstream patches it does not have all the functionality of the Ubuntu
ti-omap4 kernel.

>
> In principle, we could make this move; but there could be issues I'm
> not aware of.
>
> Note that the SMP-on-UP support is fairly minimal -- only those things
> which literally will fail on UP are patched out.
>
> Cheers
> ---Dave
>
>>
 Absolutely that's the future... in fact the bootloader should work the
 same
 way with one per-arch bootloader that detects what it is running on at
 runtime, and at that point device-specific point hwpacks become very thin
 or
 non-existent and there's an epic reduction in how many different binaries
 are needed to support many boards.
>>>
>>> I can hear the collective sighs of appreciation from distribution
>>> maintainers :)
>>
>> ^^
>>
>> -Andy
>>
>> ___
>> linaro-dev mailing list
>> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
>> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>>
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Display support for Pandaboard

[John Rigby]

John,

It should work with linux-linaro-2.6.38 with the correct config.  Make
sure to turn off CONFIG_OMAP2_DSS_SDI as it cause a access fault.  See
lp:720055.

John

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:51 PM, john stultz  wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 18:57 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Feb 2011, Anand Gadiyar wrote:
>>
>> > @Nicolas,
>> >
>> > None of these have been queued up by the respective maintainers yet,
>> > so they aren't in linux-next as of today. However I believe there are
>> > no outstanding review comments for these.
>> >
>> > I can send a pull request for these if it's okay with you. Let me know
>> > if you need them based off any particular tag/commit/branch.
>>
>> Feedback so far appears to be fine from what I've seen.
>>
>> Pulled and pushed out.
>
> So I just got a panda board, and I've been trying to get display output
> on either of the hdmi connections with either the linaro-2.6.37 tree or
> the linaro-2.6-38 tree and neither of them seem to be working for me.
>
> Building with the same config the hdmi on my beagleboard xm works fine.
> Is there some subtle config difference needed?
>
> Anand: Any tips here? Or are there more patches still pending?
>
> thanks
> -john
>
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

[PATCH] ARM: omap3: Fix assembler breakage in sleep34xx.S

[John Rigby]

Assembler in latest binutils needs extra option to enable smc
instructions introduced in:

ARM: omap3: Remove hand-encoded SMC instructions

Signed-off-by: John Rigby 
---
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile |2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
index 898fffe..1d2d1f6 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX)  += sr_device.o 
smartreflex.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX_CLASS3)  += smartreflex-class3.o
 
 AFLAGS_sleep24xx.o :=-Wa,-march=armv6
-AFLAGS_sleep34xx.o :=-Wa,-march=armv7-a
+AFLAGS_sleep34xx.o :=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
 
 ifeq ($(CONFIG_PM_VERBOSE),y)
 CFLAGS_pm_bus.o+= -DDEBUG
-- 
1.7.1


___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [PATCH 00/12][RFC] Intial Kconfig Fragment Demo

[John Rigby]

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:18 AM, John Stultz  wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-09 at 10:17 +0200, Amit Kucheria wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 4:32 AM, John Stultz  wrote:
>> > My solution is to have a Kconfig.distro file, which is patched
>> > with Distro specific policy config, such as which filesystems
>> > should be enabled, networking policy, debug options, or periphrial
>> > driver modules that should be enabled. Basically anything that
>> > isn't hardware specific (by that I mean, part of the architecture
>> > or wired on the board).
>>
>> The Ubuntu configs do something similar. The config generator makes a
>> 3-level config - distro, arch, board.
>>
>> But this is encapsulated under the debian packaging rather than in the
>> kernel source. That is why you probably haven't seen it yet. Look at
>> git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-natty.git under
>> debian.linaro/config.
>>
>> Most kernel developers, however, don't really care about creating a
>> .deb package of the kernel to test new code. They'd rather have the
>> config available in the sources. So I agree that we should fix this
>> problem for them. If it turns out that in fixing this problem we fix
>> it for distros too, great!
>
> Yea, I am aware of some of the approaches that distros use, usually
> assembling .config fragments into a larger config at build time.
>
> And its in part because each distro has tried to solve the same issue
> out of the kernel that I'm interested in trying to solve the problem in
> the kernel source at the Kconfig level.
>
>
>> > From there, I add in as much of the generic Linaro config policy
>> > as I could, utilizing the config files that were used to build
>> > the omap3, imx51 and vexpress hardware packs.
>> >
>> > Since the Linaro config polciy is not unified at this point
>> > (in other words, each board has totally different set of generic
>> > policy options configured). I added the per target differences
>> > into the board kconfig fragments.
>>
>> No, it doesn't. The system they use allows for unified configs. The
>> Ubuntu kernel has unified configs across 3-4 architectures.
>
> Huh. Are you sure? Because the configs found in the hwpacks are very
> different. I'll grant that the build system allows for unified config,
> but I don't think the Linaro kernels are making much use of it.
>
> omap vs vexpress being the best example of really wide differences:
> o cgroup support
> o bsd process accounting
> o xattr support for ext3/ext4
> o different preempt models
> o highres timers & no_hz
> etc..
Yes, the configs in the packaged kernel are not in sync.  The reason
is mostly historical.  The omap config started with a ubuntu kernel
config which is indeed unified across arches so it has lots of stuff
on that we probably don't need in a linaro kernel.

The other configs started as configs from the kernel def configs plus
whatever it took to make the config checker happy (things like
security issues). We probably would not break may linaro supported
platforms if we stripped down the omap config to be more similar to
the other SOCs.  I thought at one time that this was not a good idea
because there was a plan for ubuntu to use the linaro omap kernel.
That has not yet happened so at this time having the linaro omap
kernel config out of sync with the ubuntu one may not be a problem.
>
>
>> The problem is starting a new config for a new board/SoC. The current
>> config system expects a full config for the board dropped into place
>> and then let the tool split it out into distro/arch and board
>> components. If this causes any changes to the distro/arch configs, you
>> know you might have missed some options.
>
> I'll have to take a look at this.
>
> thanks
> -john
>
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

build error

[John Rigby]

Nicolas,

With the patch:

ARM: 6746/1: remove the 4x expansion presumption while decompressing the kernel

I get a build error.  This is when building my packaged kernel with
debuild.  Notice the stat failure __after__ the "Kernel:
arch/arm/boot/Image is ready message".  Then later ld fails because of
the stat failure.

  GEN .version
  CHK include/generated/compile.h
  LD  .tmp_vmlinux1
  KSYM.tmp_kallsyms1.S
  AS  .tmp_kallsyms1.o
  LD  .tmp_vmlinux2
  KSYM.tmp_kallsyms2.S
  AS  .tmp_kallsyms2.o
  LD  vmlinux
  SYSMAP  System.map
  SYSMAP  .tmp_System.map
  OBJCOPY arch/arm/boot/Image
  Kernel: arch/arm/boot/Image is ready
stat: cannot stat `arch/arm/boot/compressed/../Image': No such file or directory
  AS  arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o
  GZIParch/arm/boot/compressed/piggy.gzip
  CC  arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.o
  CC  arch/arm/boot/compressed/decompress.o
  SHIPPED arch/arm/boot/compressed/lib1funcs.S
  AS  arch/arm/boot/compressed/lib1funcs.o
  AS  arch/arm/boot/compressed/piggy.gzip.o
  LD  arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux
arm-linux-gnueabi-ld:--defsym _image_size=: syntax error

The odd thing is that after the failure I can look in the directory
and Image is there so its like it some kind of race?

For the moment I am working around this be reverting this patch but
obviously thats not a real solution.

Thanks,
John

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Thumb-2 kernel on imx51/efikamx

[John Rigby]

Dave,

If you check out the omap-only branch of
git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-natty.git.

Then
fakeroot ./debian/rules clean
fakeroot ./debian/rules editconfigs
Turn on Thumb2

If you look in the output you will see the file in /tmp that was used
to assemble the config.

If you want to build the packaged kernel then go follow along...

## Make a couple of changes in order to cross compile:
## turn off tools (actually do_tools is already off for omap)
sed -i -e 's/do_tools.*=.*/do_tools = false/' debian.linaro/rules.d/armel.mk
## turn off dh_strip
sed -i -e 's/dh_strip.*pkghdr.*/echo skipping dh_strip for cross
build/' debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk
Then debuild:
debuild -eCROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- -nc -ns -aarmel -b

If you have any questions please ask.

John

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:07 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:19 PM, John Rigby  wrote:
>> Dave,
>>
>> Not sure if you noticed in the IRC logs so here is what happened for
>> the packaged release.
>>
>> Pulled latest linux-linaro-2.6.38 that has your patches.
>>
>> Fixed arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile to allow smc instructions in
>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/sleep34xx.S
>>
>> Disabled CONFIG_BINFMT_AOUT.
>>
>> The resulting kernel builds and boots but some modules have problems:
>>
>> $ modprobe fat
>> fat: unknown relocation: 102
>> FATAL: Error inserting vfat
>>
>> So if we had deployed this kernel we would have images that are not
>> upgradeable since we need access to the fat partition to install new
>> uImage and uInitrd.
>>
>> On the positive side we did get some testing and know there is at
>> least one module relocation problem.
>>
>> John
>
> Thanks for trying it.  I confess I hadn't tested modules much, since
> module support with Thumb-2 has been in the kernel for ages and is not
> arch-specific.
>
> Can you give me a pointer to the exact config which was used, so I can
> try and reproduce it?  Is there a build log?
>
> IIUC, that relocation should not be ending up in modules: it's a short
> branch with range +/-2K, so fixup would rarely succeed.
>
> Maybe there is a tools issue, or some missing processing step when
> .kos get generated...
>
> Cheers
> ---Dave
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Thumb-2 kernel on imx51/efikamx

[John Rigby]

Dave,

Not sure if you noticed in the IRC logs so here is what happened for
the packaged release.

Pulled latest linux-linaro-2.6.38 that has your patches.

Fixed arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile to allow smc instructions in
arch/arm/mach-omap2/sleep34xx.S

Disabled CONFIG_BINFMT_AOUT.

The resulting kernel builds and boots but some modules have problems:

$ modprobe fat
fat: unknown relocation: 102
FATAL: Error inserting vfat

So if we had deployed this kernel we would have images that are not
upgradeable since we need access to the fat partition to install new
uImage and uInitrd.

On the positive side we did get some testing and know there is at
least one module relocation problem.

John





On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Dave Martin  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just tested the imx51 Thumb-2 kernel on efikamx here -- it boots fine,
> but we only went as far as the initramfs.
>
> Is anyone currently relying on CONFIG_LATENCYTOP?  If so, we should
> investigate what the incompatibility is...
>
> Cheers
> ---Dave
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Dave Martin  wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Talking with Loic just now, we thought it could be worth turning on
>> Thumb-2 in the main omap kernel package after all, since we've at
>> least seen it work on a few different boards now.  It feels ready for
>> wider testing.
>>
>> Is it possible for you to move to a newer snapshot of the 2.6.38
>> linaro tree, or will that be problematic at this stage?
>>
>>
>> Since the imx51 kernel at least seems to build and boot in Thumb, it
>> could be worth enabling a separate build in a PPA, but it's may not
>> mature enough for everyone to use as the main kernel just yet.  If you
>> want to try this, you need CONFIG_ARM_UNWIND=y, CONFIG_LATENCYTOP=n
>> and CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL=y
>>
>> Cheers
>> ---Dave
>>
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: cross-compile issue for overo

[John Rigby]

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Andy Doan  wrote:
> I just hit an issue cross-compiling the linux-linaro-2.6.37.git source.
> I'm seeing errors for arch/arm/mach-omap2/sleep34xx.S like:
>
>  Error: selected processor does not support ARM mode `smc #1'
>
> It appears to be related to commit:
>
>  98be69a ARM: omap3: Remove hand-encoded SMC instructions
>
> After doing a little searching, I stumbled across something similar from
> John Rigby:
>
>  http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=129118316614865&w=2
>
> I "fixed" the problem on my system with this patch:
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
> index f6614a6..985bc89 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
> @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX)          += sr_device.o
> smartre
>  obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_SMARTREFLEX_CLASS3)  += smartreflex-class3.o
>
>  AFLAGS_sleep24xx.o                     :=-Wa,-march=armv6
> -AFLAGS_sleep34xx.o                     :=-Wa,-march=armv7-a
> +AFLAGS_sleep34xx.o                     :=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
>
>  ifeq ($(CONFIG_PM_VERBOSE),y)
>  CFLAGS_pm_bus.o                                += -DDEBUG
>
> My question: Is this patch actually needed for cross-compiling our
> kernel, or is there some additional argument I need to pass to Make when
> building my kernel?
My best guess is that Dave is not using the latest binutils but that
is a bit surprising.
I think this fix is the right thing, unless Dave has a better fix.
>
> FYI - My current command line looks like:
>  make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- O=out V=1 uImage modules
>
> -andy
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Please reply if you got a U8500 board

[John Rigby]

I have a board with a uart breakout board.  The info on the label is:

HREFP_1.1_V33_OM_S10
ID0079F3 1023 243

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Per Forlin  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Dave told me he got 3 u8500 boards but no UART break out board. From
> what I have heard the u8500 boards for Linaro should come with a full
> kit including power supply and UART.
> If you have a u8500 board please let me know if it contains a UART
> break out board or whether it is missing.
>
> Thanks,
> Per
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Call for opinion: Linaro 'Nano' Image

[John Rigby]

U-Boot got faster in the last cycle (v2010.12).  Cache is now enabled
on arm and multiblock reads were added to the mmc driver.


On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Arnd Bergmann  wrote:
> On Friday 21 January 2011 18:42:55 David Rusling wrote:
>> Yes, but isn't initrd slow to copy from the boot media
>> (caches off, simple byte by byte copy)?
>
> I hadn't considered this, but I guess this also depends a
> lot on the boot loader that is being used. Does uboot always
> run with caches disabled, or is this board specific?
>
> If necessary, we can also find a way to create an image that
> could be either an initramfs or a real root image, or we
> could have a script that can convert whichever format we ship
> to the other one.
>
>        Arnd
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Call for opinion: Linaro 'Developer' Image

[John Rigby]

Joey,

I entered a bug for this against the omap3 kernel.  USB mouse and
keyboard work on beagle which uses the same kernel.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-linaro-omap/+bug/706033

John

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Joey Stanford
 wrote:
> fwiw, I'm using the headless image on my overo board and not
> everything on the support board is enabled... e.g. I can't plug in a
> USB keyboard or mouse (don't think it's in the kernel).
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Jamie Bennett  
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Currently we are reassessing whether or not the Headless image meets
>> the requirements for a console-only developer focused image usable for
>> kernel, boot loader, power management and other types of non-gui
>> development. Just for information the current stats as of 2011-01-21
>> are:
>>
>>  * Download Size: 64M
>>  * Download size with OMAP3 hwpack: 100M
>>  * Package count: 260
>>
>> The list of package currently on the image can be found at:
>>
>> https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/Specs/DeveloperImage#Package 
>> List
>>
>> The current thoughts are to increase the package count and download
>> size by adding a number of developer focused packages. The initial
>> list of additional packages can be found at:
>>
>> https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Foundations/Specs/DeveloperImage#Design
>>
>> Is there anything missing? A more stripped down 'nano' image will be
>> produced for board bring-up and verification, see my other email
>> entitled "Call for opinion: Linaro 'Nano' Image" for more information.
>>
>> Is anyone *really* against this idea and is satisfied with the
>> Headless image in its current state? Opinions? Thoughts? Criticisms?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jamie.
>> --
>> Linaro Release Manager
>>
>> ___
>> linaro-dev mailing list
>> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
>> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>>
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Hardware Packs v2

[John Rigby]

Sorry for entering late here.  Here are my questions:

How does l-m-c know about the boot partition convention?  Is the fact
that omap wants a dos partition with some files on it but i.MX just
needs the raw bits at a fixed location on the card embedded in l-m-c?
If a new platform pops up with a completely different convention does
l-m-c need to be modified or could we put a script in the hwpack to do
that?

For map you could call a script with an argument pointing to the blown
out hwpack and and second argument pointing at the mounted boot
partition.
For mx first argument is the same second is a pointer to raw device.
So the hwpack would need a field to say if the scipt needs a raw
device or mounted dos partition and..
another field with the script name.

Is this over engineering?

Sorry for the noise,
John

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Loïc Minier  wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011, James Westby wrote:
>> Right, but what would they do? That's my point.
>>
>> If you really want to push Andoid in to v2 then we can write code to
>> identify/specify image type, then defer Android/linux_image combination
>> with a specific error message.
>>
>> The point of a format specifier is such that l-i-t won't try to act on
>> things that are added after that version was released. If the old code
>> won't do the wrong thing then we don't need a format bump.
>
>  That's exactly my point: have the next version of the code try to do
>  the right thing.  Maybe I actually have broken expectations: I expect
>  l-i-t would reject hwpacks with unknown fields.  That's the failure
>  I'm trying to avoid if we know we're going to introduce a linux_image
>  field and that it can be safely ignored.
>
>  It's a bit like when Debian introduced Breaks, by adding support to
>  dpkg to simply treat the field in a dumb way, and then adding full
>  support the next cycle, as to allow using old dpkg for upgrades.
>
> --
> Loïc Minier
>
> ___
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
>

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

new linaro u-boot ready for uploading

[John Rigby]

The following changes since commit a581cf741c49c220d159fac1fdbde28255c2e7e3:

  Merge branch 'linaro-stable' into linaro-packaged (2011-01-03 14:41:56 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.linaro.org/boot/u-boot-linaro-stable.git packaged

John Rigby (2):
  debian/rules: remove -Bsymbolic-functions from LDFLAGS
  u-boot-linaro-2010.12-0ubuntu1

 debian/changelog |   17 -
 debian/rules |4 
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

natty linux-linaro-meta pull request

[John Rigby]

The following changes since commit 935e2f757e75f23e9c1b760cd096746191383aea:

  LINARO: Linaro-2.6.37.1000.1 (2010-11-26 21:20:11 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-meta-linaro-natty.git master

John Rigby (1):
  LINARO: Linaro-2.6.37.1001.2

 meta-source/debian/changelog |6 ++
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

natty linux-linaro pull request

[John Rigby]

master branch (no source debs are generated from this)
The following changes since commit 8021828c8fb6babaea671eba90c838492744dc10:

  LINARO: Linux-linaro-2.6.37-1000.3 (2010-12-13 16:50:04 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-natty.git master

John Rigby (6):
  LINARO: Start new release
  LINARO: rebase on new upstreams
  LINARO: remove ports cruft
  LINARO: update configs
  LINARO: better common package naming
  LINARO: Linux-linaro-2.6.37-1001.4

 .../abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 => 2.6.37-1000.3}/abiname   |0
 .../armel/linaro-mx51  |0
 .../armel/linaro-mx51.modules  |0
 .../armel/linaro-omap  |0
 .../armel/linaro-omap.modules  |0
 .../armel/linaro-vexpress  |0
 .../armel/linaro-vexpress.modules  |0
 debian.linaro/changelog|   14 +
 .../config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-mx51|3 -
 .../config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-omap|3 -
 .../config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-vexpress|3 -
 debian.linaro/config/config.common.ports   | 4253 
 debian.linaro/config/config.common.ubuntu  |3 +
 debian.linaro/control.d/flavour-control.stub   |2 +-
 debian.linaro/control.stub.in  |2 +-
 debian.linaro/rules.d/vars.mk  |1 +
 debian/rules   |4 +-
 debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk|   10 +-
 debian/rules.d/1-maintainer.mk |2 +-
 19 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 4271 deletions(-)
 rename debian.linaro/abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 => 2.6.37-1000.3}/abiname (100%)
 rename debian.linaro/abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 =>
2.6.37-1000.3}/armel/linaro-mx51 (100%)
 rename debian.linaro/abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 =>
2.6.37-1000.3}/armel/linaro-mx51.modules (100%)
 rename debian.linaro/abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 =>
2.6.37-1000.3}/armel/linaro-omap (100%)
 rename debian.linaro/abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 =>
2.6.37-1000.3}/armel/linaro-omap.modules (100%)
 rename debian.linaro/abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 =>
2.6.37-1000.3}/armel/linaro-vexpress (100%)
 rename debian.linaro/abi/{2.6.37-1000.2 =>
2.6.37-1000.3}/armel/linaro-vexpress.modules (100%)
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/config/config.common.ports
 create mode 100644 debian.linaro/rules.d/vars.mk

branch for creating source package for mx51

The following changes since commit 604352fad25d414fdc5334e6d2b1b6a5c88b0e87:

  LINARO: Linux-linaro-2.6.37-1001.4 (2010-12-13 17:19:38 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-natty.git mx51-only

John Rigby (1):
  LINARO: Linaro-2.6.37-1001.4 mx51 only

 debian.linaro/changelog|   42 +-
 .../config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-omap|  568 
 .../config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-vexpress|  560 ---
 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-omap   |8 -
 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-vexpress   |8 -
 debian.linaro/d-i/kernel-versions.in   |2 -
 debian.linaro/rules.d/armel.mk |4 +-
 7 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 1169 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-omap
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-vexpress
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-omap
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-vexpress

branch for creating source package for omap

The following changes since commit 604352fad25d414fdc5334e6d2b1b6a5c88b0e87:

  LINARO: Linux-linaro-2.6.37-1001.4 (2010-12-13 17:19:38 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro-natty.git omap-only

John Rigby (1):
  LINARO: Linaro-2.6.37-1001.4 omap only

 debian.linaro/changelog|   42 +-
 .../config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-mx51|  532 ---
 .../config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-vexpress|  560 
 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-mx51   |8 -
 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-vexpress   |8 -
 debian.linaro/d-i/kernel-versions.in   |2 -
 debian.linaro/rules.d/armel.mk |6 +-
 7 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1134 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-mx51
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/config/armel/config.flavour.linaro-vexpress
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-mx51
 delete mode 100644 debian.linaro/control.d/vars.linaro-vexpress

branch for creating source package for vexpress

The following changes since commit 604352fad25d414fdc5334e6d2b1b6a5c88b0e87:

  LINARO: Linux-linaro-2.6.37-1001.4 (2010-12-13 17:19:38 

maverick linux-meta-linaro pull request

[John Rigby]

The following changes since commit 61cb9ff7af265a28043724678b4d3b0482c2e525:

  LINARO: Linaro-2.6.35.1008.13 (2010-10-22 07:02:42 -0600)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-meta-linaro.git master

John Rigby (1):
  LINARO: Linaro-2.6.35.1010.14

 meta-source/debian/changelog |6 ++
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev