Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote: -Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:16 PM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller Hub +development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay-noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... For example in the current way the BSPs are published, this is shown on the YP website for crownbay Intel Atom Processor E660 with Intel Platform Controller Hub EG20T Development Kit Version: 7.0 Denzil Release date: 29 Jun 2012 Type: BSP Download Links: Crown Bay Crown Bay no EMGD Release Notes So there is one BSP list item per h/w with multiple links to different BSP tarballs for the same hardware. If we move the WebTitle in machine file, then we will have multiple items in the BSP list for the same hardware. I am not sure which is better from the downloader's point of view. But this is worth considering for this change. Yeah, on the one hand if we have text that's the same for all BSPs in the layer, it could go in the README for lack of a better common place. But we should consider whether we want to lay things out as the crownbay above, or more like the cedartrail, which has: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with PowerVR Graphics (there's no corresponding -nopvr version available, though I suspect that's an oversight and would have been something like: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with VESA Graphics I'm not sure the field(s) need to map exactly to the page layout, but all the information should be there to allow the page to be generated or laid out by hand without having to ask questions, in either case. Did you have any idea as to how for example to distinguish between the emgd and -noemgd versions (side note: there's nothing in the current entry that tells the user what EMGD even is - should it at least be spelled out in the title, or do we need a separate subtext element to describe that?) Tom + +Compliance: + For consistency with the rest of the README, please remove the colon and clean up the underlining. Will do. Thanks, Nitin Thanks, Tom +This BSP is compliant with Yocto Project as per requirements listed here: +http://www.yoctoproject.org/yocto-project-compatible-registration + + Dependencies @@ -22,7 +31,7 @@ This layer depends on: branch: master URI: git://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-intel - layers: intel + layers: meta-intel, meta-crownbay branch: master ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
On 10/24/2012 09:43 AM, Tom Zanussi wrote: On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote: -Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:16 PM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller Hub +development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay-noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... For example in the current way the BSPs are published, this is shown on the YP website for crownbay Intel Atom Processor E660 with Intel Platform Controller Hub EG20T Development Kit Version: 7.0 Denzil Release date: 29 Jun 2012 Type: BSP Download Links: Crown Bay Crown Bay no EMGD Release Notes So there is one BSP list item per h/w with multiple links to different BSP tarballs for the same hardware. If we move the WebTitle in machine file, then we will have multiple items in the BSP list for the same hardware. I am not sure which is better from the downloader's point of view. But this is worth considering for this change. Yeah, on the one hand if we have text that's the same for all BSPs in the layer, it could go in the README for lack of a better common place. But we should consider whether we want to lay things out as the crownbay above, or more like the cedartrail, which has: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with PowerVR Graphics (there's no corresponding -nopvr version available, though I suspect that's an oversight and would have been something like: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with VESA Graphics I'm not sure the field(s) need to map exactly to the page layout, but all the information should be there to allow the page to be generated or laid out by hand without having to ask questions, in either case. Did you have any idea as to how for example to distinguish between the emgd and -noemgd versions (side note: there's nothing in the current entry that tells the user what EMGD even is - should it at least be spelled out in the title, or do we need a separate subtext element to describe that?) I like the Cedar Trail description with the graphics mentioned explicitly. Doing this in the machine conf as Tom original suggested makes perfect sense to me. If that means two entries for some machines, that's preferable to me than extra complexity of subtexts, etc. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
-Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:43 AM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote: -Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:16 PM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller +Hub development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay- noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... For example in the current way the BSPs are published, this is shown on the YP website for crownbay Intel Atom Processor E660 with Intel Platform Controller Hub EG20T Development Kit Version: 7.0 Denzil Release date: 29 Jun 2012 Type: BSP Download Links: Crown Bay Crown Bay no EMGD Release Notes So there is one BSP list item per h/w with multiple links to different BSP tarballs for the same hardware. If we move the WebTitle in machine file, then we will have multiple items in the BSP list for the same hardware. I am not sure which is better from the downloader's point of view. But this is worth considering for this change. Yeah, on the one hand if we have text that's the same for all BSPs in the layer, it could go in the README for lack of a better common place. But we should consider whether we want to lay things out as the crownbay above, or more like the cedartrail, which has: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with PowerVR Graphics (there's no corresponding -nopvr version available, though I suspect that's an oversight and would have been something like: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with VESA Graphics I'm not sure the field(s) need to map exactly to the page layout, but all the information should be there to allow the page to be generated or laid out by hand without having to ask questions, in either case. Did you have any idea as to how for example to distinguish between the emgd and -noemgd versions (side note: there's nothing in the current entry that tells the user what EMGD even is - should it at least be spelled out in the title, or do we need a separate subtext element to describe that?) I think for crownbay we should add in the title with proprietary IEMGD accelerated graphics drivers, and for crownbay-noemgd we should add with open source VESA graphics drivers And then these can go in the machine.conf files. It will make our list of BSPs bigger, but it will be clearer to people, who want to download a BSP from YP site. Shall we add these title requirements in the BSP standard format, so that other BSP provider's follow the same practice? Nitin Tom + +Compliance: + For consistency with the rest of the README, please remove the colon and clean up the underlining. Will do. Thanks,
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
-Original Message- From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Tom Zanussi Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:43 AM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote: -Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:16 PM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller +Hub development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay- noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... For example in the current way the BSPs are published, this is shown on the YP website for crownbay Intel Atom Processor E660 with Intel Platform Controller Hub EG20T Development Kit Version: 7.0 Denzil Release date: 29 Jun 2012 Type: BSP Download Links: Crown Bay Crown Bay no EMGD Release Notes So there is one BSP list item per h/w with multiple links to different BSP tarballs for the same hardware. If we move the WebTitle in machine file, then we will have multiple items in the BSP list for the same hardware. I am not sure which is better from the downloader's point of view. But this is worth considering for this change. Yeah, on the one hand if we have text that's the same for all BSPs in the layer, it could go in the README for lack of a better common place. But we should consider whether we want to lay things out as the crownbay above, or more like the cedartrail, which has: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with PowerVR Graphics (there's no corresponding -nopvr version available, though I suspect that's an oversight and would have been something like: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with VESA Graphics I'm not sure the field(s) need to map exactly to the page layout, but all the information should be there to allow the page to be generated or laid out by hand without having to ask questions, in either case. Did you have any idea as to how for example to distinguish between the emgd and -noemgd versions (side note: there's nothing in the current entry that tells the user what EMGD even is - should it at least be spelled out in the title, or do we need a separate subtext element to describe that?) Tom I am working with CEDAR trail and Crown Bay-like (SYS940X-ECX) systems. For Crown Bay, it is a little confusing to know which tar ball to download. It would be clearer to have one BSP with an option switch to enable the video. Also, it would help to know how the EMGD has been configure in the BSP and for what output ports. Having worked with EMGD there are many options. For the SYS940X-ECX, the video driver (VGA-output) doesn't load so X doesn't start. It would be nice to use EMGD to configure this myself and then add the driver, but if this can already
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
-Original Message- From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Sean Liming Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:16 AM To: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information -Original Message- From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Tom Zanussi Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:43 AM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote: -Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:16 PM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx +processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller +Hub development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay- noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... For example in the current way the BSPs are published, this is shown on the YP website for crownbay Intel Atom Processor E660 with Intel Platform Controller Hub EG20T Development Kit Version: 7.0 Denzil Release date: 29 Jun 2012 Type: BSP Download Links: Crown Bay Crown Bay no EMGD Release Notes So there is one BSP list item per h/w with multiple links to different BSP tarballs for the same hardware. If we move the WebTitle in machine file, then we will have multiple items in the BSP list for the same hardware. I am not sure which is better from the downloader's point of view. But this is worth considering for this change. Yeah, on the one hand if we have text that's the same for all BSPs in the layer, it could go in the README for lack of a better common place. But we should consider whether we want to lay things out as the crownbay above, or more like the cedartrail, which has: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with PowerVR Graphics (there's no corresponding -nopvr version available, though I suspect that's an oversight and would have been something like: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with VESA Graphics I'm not sure the field(s) need to map exactly to the page layout, but all the information should be there to allow the page to be generated or laid out by hand without having to ask questions, in either case. Did you have any idea as to how for example to distinguish between the emgd and -noemgd versions (side note: there's nothing in the current entry that tells the user what EMGD even is - should it at least be spelled out in the title, or do we need a separate subtext element to describe that?) Tom I am working with CEDAR trail and Crown Bay-like (SYS940X-ECX) systems. For Crown Bay, it is a little confusing to know which
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
-Original Message- From: Sean Liming [mailto:sean.lim...@annabooks.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:51 AM To: 'Kamble, Nitin A' Subject: RE: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information -Original Message- From: Kamble, Nitin A [mailto:nitin.a.kam...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:38 AM To: Sean Liming; yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: RE: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information -Original Message- From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Sean Liming Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:16 AM To: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information -Original Message- From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Tom Zanussi Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:43 AM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote: -Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:16 PM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx +processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T +Controller Hub development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay- noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... For example in the current way the BSPs are published, this is shown on the YP website for crownbay Intel Atom Processor E660 with Intel Platform Controller Hub EG20T Development Kit Version: 7.0 Denzil Release date: 29 Jun 2012 Type: BSP Download Links: Crown Bay Crown Bay no EMGD Release Notes So there is one BSP list item per h/w with multiple links to different BSP tarballs for the same hardware. If we move the WebTitle in machine file, then we will have multiple items in the BSP list for the same hardware. I am not sure which is better from the downloader's point of view. But this is worth considering for this change. Yeah, on the one hand if we have text that's the same for all BSPs in the layer, it could go in the README for lack of a better common place. But we should consider whether we want to lay things out as the crownbay above, or more like the cedartrail, which has: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with PowerVR Graphics (there's no corresponding -nopvr version available, though I suspect that's an oversight and would have been
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:15 -0700, Sean Liming wrote: -Original Message- From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Tom Zanussi Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:43 AM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 11:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote: -Original Message- From: Zanussi, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:16 PM To: Kamble, Nitin A Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller +Hub development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay- noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... For example in the current way the BSPs are published, this is shown on the YP website for crownbay Intel Atom Processor E660 with Intel Platform Controller Hub EG20T Development Kit Version: 7.0 Denzil Release date: 29 Jun 2012 Type: BSP Download Links: Crown Bay Crown Bay no EMGD Release Notes So there is one BSP list item per h/w with multiple links to different BSP tarballs for the same hardware. If we move the WebTitle in machine file, then we will have multiple items in the BSP list for the same hardware. I am not sure which is better from the downloader's point of view. But this is worth considering for this change. Yeah, on the one hand if we have text that's the same for all BSPs in the layer, it could go in the README for lack of a better common place. But we should consider whether we want to lay things out as the crownbay above, or more like the cedartrail, which has: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with PowerVR Graphics (there's no corresponding -nopvr version available, though I suspect that's an oversight and would have been something like: Intel® Atom™ Processor N2000 and D2000 Series-based Platform (CEDAR TRAIL) with VESA Graphics I'm not sure the field(s) need to map exactly to the page layout, but all the information should be there to allow the page to be generated or laid out by hand without having to ask questions, in either case. Did you have any idea as to how for example to distinguish between the emgd and -noemgd versions (side note: there's nothing in the current entry that tells the user what EMGD even is - should it at least be spelled out in the title, or do we need a separate subtext element to describe that?) Tom I am working with CEDAR trail and Crown Bay-like (SYS940X-ECX) systems. For Crown Bay, it is a little confusing to know which tar ball to download. It would be clearer to have one BSP with an option switch to enable the video. There is currently in the works a new web page that lists the available BSPs in a table and which platforms they map to, along
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
-The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). How can we distinguish this from Queens Bay, which I would describe in exactly the same terms? -- Darren 1st let us understand what are the differences in the crownbay queens bay platforms? If there are not significant differences then we can also look at possibility of combining two BSPs into one. I can add bit more information in the crownbay readme, such as shellbay littlebay boards. And for FRI2 you can talk about the extra M2M devices. And I am not clear how to differentiate crownbay BSP with sys94x BSP. Nitin ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
On 10/23/2012 01:24 PM, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). How can we distinguish this from Queens Bay, which I would describe in exactly the same terms? -- Darren It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller Hub development kit (crownbay) + + +Compliance: + +This BSP is compliant with Yocto Project as per requirements listed here: +http://www.yoctoproject.org/yocto-project-compatible-registration + + Dependencies @@ -22,7 +31,7 @@ This layer depends on: branch: master URI: git://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-intel - layers: intel + layers: meta-intel, meta-crownbay branch: master -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: From: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com The WebTitle will be used to publish the BSP on the Yocto Project Website. And adding the Yocto Project Compliance information for the 1.3 release. Also specifying all the layers used from meta-intel repository. Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble nitin.a.kam...@intel.com --- meta-crownbay/README | 13 +++-- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/meta-crownbay/README b/meta-crownbay/README index 4bc9f31..3996a94 100644 --- a/meta-crownbay/README +++ b/meta-crownbay/README @@ -2,13 +2,22 @@ This README file contains information on building the meta-crownbay BSP layer, and booting the images contained in the /binary directory. Please see the corresponding sections below for details. -The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom Z6xx processor, +The Crown Bay platform consists of the Intel Atom E6xx processor, plus the Intel EG20T Platform Controller Hub (Tunnel Creek + Topcliff). It also supports the E6xx embedded on-chip graphics via the Intel Embedded Media and Graphics Driver (EMGD) 1.14 Driver. +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller Hub development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay-noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Or maybe just use the exisiting #@DESCRIPTION for that... + +Compliance: + For consistency with the rest of the README, please remove the colon and clean up the underlining. Thanks, Tom +This BSP is compliant with Yocto Project as per requirements listed here: +http://www.yoctoproject.org/yocto-project-compatible-registration + + Dependencies @@ -22,7 +31,7 @@ This layer depends on: branch: master URI: git://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-intel - layers: intel + layers: meta-intel, meta-crownbay branch: master ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/6] crownbay README: add WebTitle Compliance information
On 10/23/2012 02:16 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote: On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 13:24 -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: +WebTitle: Intel Atom E6xx processor with Intel EG20T Controller Hub development kit (crownbay) + I'm not sure this kind of thing should be in the README since we can have multiple downloadable BSPs per layer e.g. crownbay vs crownbay-noemgd. I suppose in keeping with the build system you could have separate WebTitle_crownbay and WebTitle_crownbay-noemgd lines. ;-) (and it would be nice if you could get rid of the CamelCaps too) Why not put this info in the machine.conf, where we already have fields meant to be machine parseable e.g. #@TYPE: Machine #@NAME: crownbay #@WEBTITLE: ... Oh much much better. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
