Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
Hi John, I have submit a new pull request and post a simple test log, please check: https://github.com/lede-project/source/pull/344 V6 patch update summary: 1.Dropping unnecessary USB_EHCI_FSL related patches. 2.Change BOARDNAME from "layerscape" to "NXP Layerscape" Thanks & Best Regards Jiang Yutang > -Original Message- > From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org] > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 1:58 PM > To: Y.T. Jiang > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > Ok, > > please also make this change in target/linux/layerscape/Makefile > > BOARDNAME:=layerscape > > to > > BOARDNAME:=NXP Layerscape > > > John > > On 28/09/2016 07:34, Y.T. Jiang wrote: > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org] > >> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 1:16 PM > >> To: Y.T. Jiang > >> Cc: LEDE Development List > >> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > >> > >> > >> > >> On 27/09/2016 13:39, Y.T. Jiang wrote: > >>> Hi John, > >>> > >>> After the survey found, the error are from a old > >>> usb2.0(USB_EHCI_FSL) > >> driver which is usually used for powerpc arch, not for layerscape > >> ls1043ardb(arm64 arch) Soc. > >>> The default kernel config and packages not enable the old usb2.0 > >>> driver > >> in my patch. It should be enabled by: > >>> [x] Select all target specific packages by default [x] Select all > >>> kernel module packages by default [x] Select all userspace packages > >>> by > >>> > >>> Further investigation found, if remove the kernel patch 8041, can > >>> avoid > >> USB_EHCI_FSL be compiled. But the patch hint, USB_EHCI_FSL will > >> appear in other arch. > >>> 8041-usb-kconfig-remove-dependency-FSL_SOC-for-ehci-fsl-d.patch > >>> "usb: kconfig: remove dependency FSL_SOC for ehci fsl driver " > >>> CONFIG_USB_EHCI_FSL is not dependent on FSL_SOC, it can be built on > >> non-PPC platforms. > >>> ... > >>> 21 config USB_EHCI_FSL > >>> 22 tristate "Support for Freescale PPC on-chip EHCI USB > >> controller" > >>> 23 - depends on FSL_SOC > >>> 24 + depends on USB_EHCI_HCD > >>> ... > >>> > >> > >> so this patch is indeed added by your series, yet the module does not > >> build. i would suggest dropping this patch as it seems totally > >> unrelated and in fact makes it not work. does your target use FSL EHCI > support ? > >> > >>John > >> > > Yes, I double check the patches, it not need indeed. In fact, some > patches was backported by other colleagues, who not familiar with special > IP block and mixed with other unnecessary patches. I will drop it and > create a new patch, after functional validation then submit a new pull > request. Thank you John. > > [Y.T. Jiang] > > > >>> If have other better ways in dealing with the dependencies in LEDE? > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks & Best Regards > >>> Jiang Yutang > >>> > >>>> -Original Message- > >>>> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org] > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 2:34 PM > >>>> To: Y.T. Jiang > >>>> Cc: LEDE Development List > >>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> i just tried V5 and when building the target with all packages > >>>> selected i run into some errors > >>>> > >>>> make[5]: Entering directory > >>>> `/home/blogic/source/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/l > >>>> in > >>>> ux- > >>>> layerscape_64b/linux-4.4.21' > >>>> CHK include/config/kernel.release > >>>> CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/bounds.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/timeconst.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h > >>>> CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh > >>>> CC [M] drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.o In file included from > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:39:0: >
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
> -Original Message-
> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 1:16 PM
> To: Y.T. Jiang
> Cc: LEDE Development List
> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>
>
>
> On 27/09/2016 13:39, Y.T. Jiang wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >
> > After the survey found, the error are from a old usb2.0(USB_EHCI_FSL)
> driver which is usually used for powerpc arch, not for layerscape
> ls1043ardb(arm64 arch) Soc.
> > The default kernel config and packages not enable the old usb2.0 driver
> in my patch. It should be enabled by:
> > [x] Select all target specific packages by default [x] Select all
> > kernel module packages by default [x] Select all userspace packages by
> >
> > Further investigation found, if remove the kernel patch 8041, can avoid
> USB_EHCI_FSL be compiled. But the patch hint, USB_EHCI_FSL will appear in
> other arch.
> > 8041-usb-kconfig-remove-dependency-FSL_SOC-for-ehci-fsl-d.patch
> > "usb: kconfig: remove dependency FSL_SOC for ehci fsl driver "
> > CONFIG_USB_EHCI_FSL is not dependent on FSL_SOC, it can be built on
> non-PPC platforms.
> > ...
> > 21 config USB_EHCI_FSL
> > 22 tristate "Support for Freescale PPC on-chip EHCI USB
> controller"
> > 23 - depends on FSL_SOC
> > 24 + depends on USB_EHCI_HCD
> > ...
> >
>
> so this patch is indeed added by your series, yet the module does not
> build. i would suggest dropping this patch as it seems totally unrelated
> and in fact makes it not work. does your target use FSL EHCI support ?
>
> John
>
Yes, I double check the patches, it not need indeed. In fact, some patches was
backported by other colleagues, who not familiar with special IP block and
mixed with other unnecessary patches. I will drop it and create a new patch,
after functional validation then submit a new pull request. Thank you John.
[Y.T. Jiang]
> > If have other better ways in dealing with the dependencies in LEDE?
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Best Regards
> > Jiang Yutang
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 2:34 PM
> >> To: Y.T. Jiang
> >> Cc: LEDE Development List
> >> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> i just tried V5 and when building the target with all packages
> >> selected i run into some errors
> >>
> >> make[5]: Entering directory
> >> `/home/blogic/source/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/lin
> >> ux-
> >> layerscape_64b/linux-4.4.21'
> >> CHK include/config/kernel.release
> >> CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
> >> CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h
> >> CHK include/generated/bounds.h
> >> CHK include/generated/timeconst.h
> >> CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h
> >> CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh
> >> CC [M] drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.o In file included from
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:39:0:
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_readl':
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:741:9: error: implicit declaration of
> >> function 'readl' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >> return readl(regs);
> >> ^
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_writel':
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:768:3: error: implicit declaration of
> >> function 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>writel(val, regs);
> >>^
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'fsl_ehci_drv_probe':
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:130:3: error: implicit declaration of
> >> function 'clrsetbits_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>clrsetbits_be32(hcd->regs + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
> >>^
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_setup_phy':
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:205:4: error: implicit declaration of
> >> function 'clrbits32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >> clrbits32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
> >> ^
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:244:9: error: implicit declaration of
> >> function 'in_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>if (!(in_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL) & PHY_CLK_VALID)) {
> >> ^
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_usb_setup':
> >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:276:3: error: impl
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
On 27/09/2016 13:39, Y.T. Jiang wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> After the survey found, the error are from a old usb2.0(USB_EHCI_FSL) driver
> which is usually used for powerpc arch, not for layerscape ls1043ardb(arm64
> arch) Soc.
> The default kernel config and packages not enable the old usb2.0 driver in my
> patch. It should be enabled by:
> [x] Select all target specific packages by default
> [x] Select all kernel module packages by default
> [x] Select all userspace packages by
>
> Further investigation found, if remove the kernel patch 8041, can avoid
> USB_EHCI_FSL be compiled. But the patch hint, USB_EHCI_FSL will appear in
> other arch.
> 8041-usb-kconfig-remove-dependency-FSL_SOC-for-ehci-fsl-d.patch
> "usb: kconfig: remove dependency FSL_SOC for ehci fsl driver "
> CONFIG_USB_EHCI_FSL is not dependent on FSL_SOC, it can be built on non-PPC
> platforms.
> ...
> 21 config USB_EHCI_FSL
> 22 tristate "Support for Freescale PPC on-chip EHCI USB controller"
> 23 - depends on FSL_SOC
> 24 + depends on USB_EHCI_HCD
> ...
>
so this patch is indeed added by your series, yet the module does not
build. i would suggest dropping this patch as it seems totally unrelated
and in fact makes it not work. does your target use FSL EHCI support ?
John
> If have other better ways in dealing with the dependencies in LEDE?
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards
> Jiang Yutang
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 2:34 PM
>> To: Y.T. Jiang
>> Cc: LEDE Development List
>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> i just tried V5 and when building the target with all packages selected i
>> run into some errors
>>
>> make[5]: Entering directory
>> `/home/blogic/source/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-
>> layerscape_64b/linux-4.4.21'
>> CHK include/config/kernel.release
>> CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
>> CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h
>> CHK include/generated/bounds.h
>> CHK include/generated/timeconst.h
>> CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h
>> CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh
>> CC [M] drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.o
>> In file included from drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:39:0:
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_readl':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:741:9: error: implicit declaration of function
>> 'readl' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> return readl(regs);
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_writel':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:768:3: error: implicit declaration of function
>> 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>writel(val, regs);
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'fsl_ehci_drv_probe':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:130:3: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'clrsetbits_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>clrsetbits_be32(hcd->regs + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_setup_phy':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:205:4: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'clrbits32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> clrbits32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:244:9: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'in_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>if (!(in_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL) & PHY_CLK_VALID)) {
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_usb_setup':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:276:3: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'out_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>out_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_SNOOP1, 0x0 | SNOOP_SIZE_2GB);
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:9: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'mfspr' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: error: 'SPRN_SVR' undeclared (first
>> use in this function)
>>svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: note: each undeclared identifier is
>> reported only once for each function it appears in
>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>
>> to reproduce this run menuconfig and then Global build settings --->
>>[x] Select all target specific packages by default
>>[x] Select all kernel module packages by default
>>[x] Select all userspace packag
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
On 27/09/2016 13:39, Y.T. Jiang wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> After the survey found, the error are from a old usb2.0(USB_EHCI_FSL) driver
> which is usually used for powerpc arch, not for layerscape ls1043ardb(arm64
> arch) Soc.
> The default kernel config and packages not enable the old usb2.0 driver in my
> patch. It should be enabled by:
> [x] Select all target specific packages by default
> [x] Select all kernel module packages by default
> [x] Select all userspace packages by
>
> Further investigation found, if remove the kernel patch 8041, can avoid
> USB_EHCI_FSL be compiled. But the patch hint, USB_EHCI_FSL will appear in
> other arch.
> 8041-usb-kconfig-remove-dependency-FSL_SOC-for-ehci-fsl-d.patch
> "usb: kconfig: remove dependency FSL_SOC for ehci fsl driver "
> CONFIG_USB_EHCI_FSL is not dependent on FSL_SOC, it can be built on non-PPC
> platforms.
> ...
> 21 config USB_EHCI_FSL
> 22 tristate "Support for Freescale PPC on-chip EHCI USB controller"
> 23 - depends on FSL_SOC
> 24 + depends on USB_EHCI_HCD
> ...
>
> If have other better ways in dealing with the dependencies in LEDE?
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards
> Jiang Yutang
>
Hi,
ok, looks like this is not related to layerscape. i'll try to have a
look at it tonight.
John
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 2:34 PM
>> To: Y.T. Jiang
>> Cc: LEDE Development List
>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> i just tried V5 and when building the target with all packages selected i
>> run into some errors
>>
>> make[5]: Entering directory
>> `/home/blogic/source/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-
>> layerscape_64b/linux-4.4.21'
>> CHK include/config/kernel.release
>> CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
>> CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h
>> CHK include/generated/bounds.h
>> CHK include/generated/timeconst.h
>> CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h
>> CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh
>> CC [M] drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.o
>> In file included from drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:39:0:
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_readl':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:741:9: error: implicit declaration of function
>> 'readl' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> return readl(regs);
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_writel':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:768:3: error: implicit declaration of function
>> 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>writel(val, regs);
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'fsl_ehci_drv_probe':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:130:3: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'clrsetbits_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>clrsetbits_be32(hcd->regs + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_setup_phy':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:205:4: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'clrbits32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> clrbits32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:244:9: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'in_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>if (!(in_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL) & PHY_CLK_VALID)) {
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_usb_setup':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:276:3: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'out_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>out_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_SNOOP1, 0x0 | SNOOP_SIZE_2GB);
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:9: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'mfspr' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
>> ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: error: 'SPRN_SVR' undeclared (first
>> use in this function)
>>svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
>>^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: note: each undeclared identifier is
>> reported only once for each function it appears in
>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>
>> to reproduce this run menuconfig and then Global build settings --->
>>[x] Select all target specific packages by default
>>[x] Select all kernel module packages by default
>>[x] Select all userspace packages by default
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21/09/2016 16:21, Y.T. Jiang wrote:
&
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
Hi,
i just tried V5 and when building the target with all packages selected
i run into some errors
make[5]: Entering directory
`/home/blogic/source/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-layerscape_64b/linux-4.4.21'
CHK include/config/kernel.release
CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h
CHK include/generated/bounds.h
CHK include/generated/timeconst.h
CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h
CALLscripts/checksyscalls.sh
CC [M] drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.o
In file included from drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:39:0:
drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_readl':
drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:741:9: error: implicit declaration of function
'readl' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
return readl(regs);
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_writel':
drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:768:3: error: implicit declaration of function
'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
writel(val, regs);
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'fsl_ehci_drv_probe':
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:130:3: error: implicit declaration of
function 'clrsetbits_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
clrsetbits_be32(hcd->regs + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_setup_phy':
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:205:4: error: implicit declaration of
function 'clrbits32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
clrbits32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:244:9: error: implicit declaration of
function 'in_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
if (!(in_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL) & PHY_CLK_VALID)) {
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_usb_setup':
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:276:3: error: implicit declaration of
function 'out_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
out_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_SNOOP1, 0x0 | SNOOP_SIZE_2GB);
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:9: error: implicit declaration of
function 'mfspr' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: error: 'SPRN_SVR' undeclared (first
use in this function)
svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
^
drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: note: each undeclared identifier is
reported only once for each function it appears in
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
to reproduce this run menuconfig and then
Global build settings --->
[x] Select all target specific packages by default
[x] Select all kernel module packages by default
[x] Select all userspace packages by default
John
On 21/09/2016 16:21, Y.T. Jiang wrote:
> Hi Rafał and John,
>
> I update the patch and pull a new requests(329), please check and review,
> thanks!
> https://github.com/lede-project/source/pull/329
>
> V5 patch update summary:
> 1.Copyrights assigned to myself.
> 2.Introduce DEVICE_TITLE and DEVICE_PACKAGES.
> 3.Rename patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx...
> 4.Refresh patches by "make target/linux/refresh V=s"
> 5.Move default packages to DEFAULT_PACKAGES.
> 6.Optimize Build/mk_firmware.
>
> Thanks & Best Regards
> Jiang Yutang
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Lede-dev [mailto:lede-dev-boun...@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of
>> Y.T. Jiang
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:28 PM
>> To: Rafa? Mi?ecki
>> Cc: LEDE Development List; John Crispin
>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>
>> Hi Rafał,
>>
>> Thank you for the detailed comment!
>>
>> Update status:
>> prefixed with ">"--done
>> Copyright--done
>> make target/linux/refresh V=s--done
>> Patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx...refer target/linux/generic/PATCHES
>> --done
>> usingDEVICE_TITLE DEVICE_PACKAGES...refer
>> target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile --ongoing
>>
>> After building and features validate, I will submit a new version patch.
>>
>>
>> Thanks & Best Regards
>> Jiang Yutang
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 7:55 PM
>>> To: Y.T. Jiang
>>> Cc: John Crispin; LEDE Development List
>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>>
>>> On 19 September 2016 at 12:36, Y.T. Jiang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> wrote:
>>>> Thank you for your review and suggestion.
>>>
>>> Sure. One more note: please take a look at your mailer configuration.
>>> It should keep all quotes prefixed with "> " to keep discussion clear.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
Hi Rafał and John, I update the patch and pull a new requests(329), please check and review, thanks! https://github.com/lede-project/source/pull/329 V5 patch update summary: 1.Copyrights assigned to myself. 2.Introduce DEVICE_TITLE and DEVICE_PACKAGES. 3.Rename patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx... 4.Refresh patches by "make target/linux/refresh V=s" 5.Move default packages to DEFAULT_PACKAGES. 6.Optimize Build/mk_firmware. Thanks & Best Regards Jiang Yutang > -Original Message- > From: Lede-dev [mailto:lede-dev-boun...@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of > Y.T. Jiang > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:28 PM > To: Rafa? Mi?ecki > Cc: LEDE Development List; John Crispin > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > Hi Rafał, > > Thank you for the detailed comment! > > Update status: > prefixed with ">" --done > Copyright --done > make target/linux/refresh V=s --done > Patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx...refer target/linux/generic/PATCHES > --done > using DEVICE_TITLE DEVICE_PACKAGES...refer > target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile --ongoing > > After building and features validate, I will submit a new version patch. > > > Thanks & Best Regards > Jiang Yutang > > > -Original Message- > > From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 7:55 PM > > To: Y.T. Jiang > > Cc: John Crispin; LEDE Development List > > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > > > On 19 September 2016 at 12:36, Y.T. Jiang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> wrote: > > > Thank you for your review and suggestion. > > > > Sure. One more note: please take a look at your mailer configuration. > > It should keep all quotes prefixed with "> " to keep discussion clear. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_quoting > > > > > > > -----Original Message- > > > From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 4:01 PM > > > To: John Crispin > > > Cc: LEDE Development List; Y.T. Jiang > > > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > > > > > On 18 September 2016 at 14:24, John Crispin <j...@phrozen.org> wrote: > > >> i have just spent some time reviewing the layerscape PR [1] and > > >> started a full build of it. its starting to look good and i cannot > > >> see any blockers. if anyone has any hold on this please let me know > > >> in the next couple of days. if i dont get any vetos i will merge it. > > > > > > I can see following Copyright line over and over: > > > Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org > > > Yutang: did you really sign a contract with OpenWrt that included > > passing your copyrights to the OpenWrt project? If not, you should > > just keep Copyrights assigned to yourself. > > > I really would like assigning copyrights to projects where it > > > doesn't > > apply. > > > [I do not sign a contract with OpenWrt indeed. I refer to some > > > others target while developing/backporting layerscape, I find almost > > > of targets included OpenWrt.org Copyright, so I also put it in my > > > code files. Now should I replace " Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org" > with " > > > Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ? or retain > > > the both copyright: "Copyright (C) LEDE project, Jiang Yutang > > > <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ?] > > > > You're correct, current sources are messy about this. I'm trying to > > stop adding mode incorrectly copyrighted code. > > > > You should only have something like: > > Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> for the code > > you have written. > > > > > > > What about using some generic profile only and then using > > > DEVICE_TITLE > > DEVICE_PACKAGES to specify modules that should be included on rootfs? > > > [I will try to use the two variables.] > > > > Thanks! This will allow building images for customized boards with a > > single "make" call. It's part of recently introduced > > TARGET_PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS system. You may take a look at > > target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile as an example. There is only 1 > > subtarget, but it should give you a hint anyway. > > > > > > > Would that be possible to split patches into accepted ones > > > (backports) > > and LEDE-specific ones? > > > [The k
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
Hi Rafał, Thank you for the detailed comment! Update status: prefixed with ">" --done Copyright --done make target/linux/refresh V=s --done Patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx...refer target/linux/generic/PATCHES --done using DEVICE_TITLE DEVICE_PACKAGES...refer target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile--ongoing After building and features validate, I will submit a new version patch. Thanks & Best Regards Jiang Yutang > -Original Message- > From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 7:55 PM > To: Y.T. Jiang > Cc: John Crispin; LEDE Development List > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > On 19 September 2016 at 12:36, Y.T. Jiang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> wrote: > > Thank you for your review and suggestion. > > Sure. One more note: please take a look at your mailer configuration. > It should keep all quotes prefixed with "> " to keep discussion clear. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_quoting > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 4:01 PM > > To: John Crispin > > Cc: LEDE Development List; Y.T. Jiang > > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > > > On 18 September 2016 at 14:24, John Crispin <j...@phrozen.org> wrote: > >> i have just spent some time reviewing the layerscape PR [1] and > >> started a full build of it. its starting to look good and i cannot > >> see any blockers. if anyone has any hold on this please let me know > >> in the next couple of days. if i dont get any vetos i will merge it. > > > > I can see following Copyright line over and over: > > Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org > > Yutang: did you really sign a contract with OpenWrt that included > passing your copyrights to the OpenWrt project? If not, you should just > keep Copyrights assigned to yourself. > > I really would like assigning copyrights to projects where it doesn't > apply. > > [I do not sign a contract with OpenWrt indeed. I refer to some others > > target while developing/backporting layerscape, I find almost of > > targets included OpenWrt.org Copyright, so I also put it in my code > > files. Now should I replace " Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org" with " > > Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ? or retain > > the both copyright: "Copyright (C) LEDE project, Jiang Yutang > > <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ?] > > You're correct, current sources are messy about this. I'm trying to stop > adding mode incorrectly copyrighted code. > > You should only have something like: > Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> for the code you > have written. > > > > What about using some generic profile only and then using DEVICE_TITLE > DEVICE_PACKAGES to specify modules that should be included on rootfs? > > [I will try to use the two variables.] > > Thanks! This will allow building images for customized boards with a > single "make" call. It's part of recently introduced > TARGET_PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS system. You may take a look at > target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile as an example. There is only 1 > subtarget, but it should give you a hint anyway. > > > > Would that be possible to split patches into accepted ones (backports) > and LEDE-specific ones? > > [The kernel patches: dpaa/qbman/fman/etc. it is really too big and > > interference review LEDE-specially code. I will split those kernel > > patches in folder patches-4.4 as the second, and keep the rest as fist > > LEDE-specific, what do you think about it?] > > For generic patches we have a following guide: > target/linux/generic/PATCHES > > You may try to follow this, if possible. E.g. you could use 0xxx prefix > for upstream accepted patches and some other prefix 1xxx, 2xxx, or > whatever applicable for other ones. > > It isn't a strict rule for targets, but it should make your target easier > to maintain I believe. > > > > Please refresh all target patches, right now I can see they contain all > these things like: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index > > 4cb98aa..a8a97bd 100644 > > 1.7.9.5 > > [I found it have conflicts in current kernel version with two > > patches(arm64/mm related, 0060 and 0061) while backporting the > > dpaa/qbman/fman driver, but I'm unacquainted with both mm and dpaa, > > our dpaa team are engaged in do upstream work and can't help me. So I >
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
On 19 September 2016 at 12:36, Y.T. Jiang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> wrote: > Thank you for your review and suggestion. Sure. One more note: please take a look at your mailer configuration. It should keep all quotes prefixed with "> " to keep discussion clear. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_quoting > -Original Message- > From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 4:01 PM > To: John Crispin > Cc: LEDE Development List; Y.T. Jiang > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > On 18 September 2016 at 14:24, John Crispin <j...@phrozen.org> wrote: >> i have just spent some time reviewing the layerscape PR [1] and >> started a full build of it. its starting to look good and i cannot see >> any blockers. if anyone has any hold on this please let me know in the >> next couple of days. if i dont get any vetos i will merge it. > > I can see following Copyright line over and over: > Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org > Yutang: did you really sign a contract with OpenWrt that included passing > your copyrights to the OpenWrt project? If not, you should just keep > Copyrights assigned to yourself. > I really would like assigning copyrights to projects where it doesn't apply. > [I do not sign a contract with OpenWrt indeed. I refer to some others target > while developing/backporting layerscape, I find almost of targets included > OpenWrt.org Copyright, so I also put it in my code files. Now should I > replace " Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org" with " Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang > Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ? or retain the both copyright: "Copyright (C) > LEDE project, Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ?] You're correct, current sources are messy about this. I'm trying to stop adding mode incorrectly copyrighted code. You should only have something like: Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> for the code you have written. > What about using some generic profile only and then using DEVICE_TITLE > DEVICE_PACKAGES to specify modules that should be included on rootfs? > [I will try to use the two variables.] Thanks! This will allow building images for customized boards with a single "make" call. It's part of recently introduced TARGET_PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS system. You may take a look at target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile as an example. There is only 1 subtarget, but it should give you a hint anyway. > Would that be possible to split patches into accepted ones (backports) and > LEDE-specific ones? > [The kernel patches: dpaa/qbman/fman/etc. it is really too big and > interference review LEDE-specially code. I will split those kernel patches in > folder patches-4.4 as the second, and keep the rest as fist LEDE-specific, > what do you think about it?] For generic patches we have a following guide: target/linux/generic/PATCHES You may try to follow this, if possible. E.g. you could use 0xxx prefix for upstream accepted patches and some other prefix 1xxx, 2xxx, or whatever applicable for other ones. It isn't a strict rule for targets, but it should make your target easier to maintain I believe. > Please refresh all target patches, right now I can see they contain all these > things like: > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index > 4cb98aa..a8a97bd 100644 > 1.7.9.5 > [I found it have conflicts in current kernel version with two > patches(arm64/mm related, 0060 and 0061) while backporting the > dpaa/qbman/fman driver, but I'm unacquainted with both mm and dpaa, our dpaa > team are engaged in do upstream work and can't help me. So I revert the two > patch to bypass this issue temporary, I would like to wait for more leisure > time then to thorough investigate and solve it.] I think you misunderstood me. I don't have anything against your patches, just the format. Please call make target/linux/refresh V=s and that will convert all your patches to the expected format :) -- Rafał ___ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
Hi Rafał and John, Thank you for your review and suggestion. Please see inline comments. Thanks & Best Regards Jiang Yutang -Original Message- From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 4:01 PM To: John Crispin Cc: LEDE Development List; Y.T. Jiang Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target On 18 September 2016 at 14:24, John Crispin <j...@phrozen.org> wrote: > i have just spent some time reviewing the layerscape PR [1] and > started a full build of it. its starting to look good and i cannot see > any blockers. if anyone has any hold on this please let me know in the > next couple of days. if i dont get any vetos i will merge it. I can see following Copyright line over and over: Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org Yutang: did you really sign a contract with OpenWrt that included passing your copyrights to the OpenWrt project? If not, you should just keep Copyrights assigned to yourself. I really would like assigning copyrights to projects where it doesn't apply. [I do not sign a contract with OpenWrt indeed. I refer to some others target while developing/backporting layerscape, I find almost of targets included OpenWrt.org Copyright, so I also put it in my code files. Now should I replace " Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org" with " Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ? or retain the both copyright: "Copyright (C) LEDE project, Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ?] What about using some generic profile only and then using DEVICE_TITLE DEVICE_PACKAGES to specify modules that should be included on rootfs? [I will try to use the two variables.] Would that be possible to split patches into accepted ones (backports) and LEDE-specific ones? [The kernel patches: dpaa/qbman/fman/etc. it is really too big and interference review LEDE-specially code. I will split those kernel patches in folder patches-4.4 as the second, and keep the rest as fist LEDE-specific, what do you think about it?] Please refresh all target patches, right now I can see they contain all these things like: diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index 4cb98aa..a8a97bd 100644 1.7.9.5 [I found it have conflicts in current kernel version with two patches(arm64/mm related, 0060 and 0061) while backporting the dpaa/qbman/fman driver, but I'm unacquainted with both mm and dpaa, our dpaa team are engaged in do upstream work and can't help me. So I revert the two patch to bypass this issue temporary, I would like to wait for more leisure time then to thorough investigate and solve it.] -- Rafał ___ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
[LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
Hi all, i have just spent some time reviewing the layerscape PR [1] and started a full build of it. its starting to look good and i cannot see any blockers. if anyone has any hold on this please let me know in the next couple of days. if i dont get any vetos i will merge it. John [1] https://github.com/lede-project/source/pull/323 ___ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
