On 21.02.24 10:10, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> Hello Jan,
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 07:37:55PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> My personal observation is that continuous integration testings with
>> all-upstream components is not really a common thing. I saw that with
>> multiple active SoCs from
Hello Jan,
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 07:37:55PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> My personal observation is that continuous integration testings with
> all-upstream components is not really a common thing. I saw that with
> multiple active SoCs from various vendors.
With some limitation we have this
On 08:48-20240220, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 19.02.24 19:37, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > On 17.02.24 12:36, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
> >> Hi Jan!
> >>
> >> On Sat, 2024-02-17 at 09:42 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> U-Boot 2024.01 (Feb 15 2024 - 01:43:17 +0100)
>
> SoC: AM62X SR1.0 HS-FS
>
On 19:37-20240219, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> My personal observation is that continuous integration testings with
> all-upstream components is not really a common thing. I saw that with
> multiple active SoCs from various vendors.
For what it is worth, https://software-dl.ti.com/cicd-report/upstream/
On 19.02.24 19:37, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 17.02.24 12:36, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
>> Hi Jan!
>>
>> On Sat, 2024-02-17 at 09:42 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
U-Boot 2024.01 (Feb 15 2024 - 01:43:17 +0100)
SoC: AM62X SR1.0 HS-FS
Model: Texas Instruments AM625 SK
DRAM: 2 GiB
On 17.02.24 12:36, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
> Hi Jan!
>
> On Sat, 2024-02-17 at 09:42 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> U-Boot 2024.01 (Feb 15 2024 - 01:43:17 +0100)
>>>
>>> SoC: AM62X SR1.0 HS-FS
>>> Model: Texas Instruments AM625 SK
>>> DRAM: 2 GiB
>>> Core: 56 devices, 23 uclasses, devicetree:
Hi Jan!
On Sat, 2024-02-17 at 09:42 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > U-Boot 2024.01 (Feb 15 2024 - 01:43:17 +0100)
> >
> > SoC: AM62X SR1.0 HS-FS
> > Model: Texas Instruments AM625 SK
> > DRAM: 2 GiB
> > Core: 56 devices, 23 uclasses, devicetree: separate
> > MMC: mmc@fa1: 0, mmc@fa0:
On 17.02.24 04:11, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
> Hello Nishanth,
>
> On Fri, 2023-08-25 at 13:02 -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>> Switch to using bootstd. Note with this change, we will stop using
>> distro_bootcmd and instead depend entirely on bootflow method of
>> starting the system up.
>>
>>
Hello Nishanth,
On Fri, 2023-08-25 at 13:02 -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> Switch to using bootstd. Note with this change, we will stop using
> distro_bootcmd and instead depend entirely on bootflow method of
> starting the system up.
>
> Suggested-by: Tom Rini
> Suggested-by: Simon Glass
>
On ven., août 25, 2023 at 13:02, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> Switch to using bootstd. Note with this change, we will stop using
> distro_bootcmd and instead depend entirely on bootflow method of
> starting the system up.
>
> Suggested-by: Tom Rini
> Suggested-by: Simon Glass
> Reviewed-by: Tom
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 01:02:52PM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> Switch to using bootstd. Note with this change, we will stop using
> distro_bootcmd and instead depend entirely on bootflow method of
> starting the system up.
>
> Suggested-by: Tom Rini
> Suggested-by: Simon Glass
>
Switch to using bootstd. Note with this change, we will stop using
distro_bootcmd and instead depend entirely on bootflow method of
starting the system up.
Suggested-by: Tom Rini
Suggested-by: Simon Glass
Reviewed-by: Tom Rini
Tested-by: Mattijs Korpershoek
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon
---
12 matches
Mail list logo
