[meta-ti] [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and K2E boot monitor build support

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

Hao,

Do you have any questions about the changes needed here? Will you be sending 
the updated patch? Please let me know if you need any additional help. Thanks.

-- 
Denys


On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:04:52AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:48:57AM -0400, Maupin, Chase wrote:
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > >Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 11:33 AM
> > >To: Zhang, Hao
> > >Cc: Maupin, Chase; Shilimkar, Santosh; Rini, Tom; meta-
> > >ti at yoctoproject.org
> > >Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and K2E boot
> > >monitor build support
> > >
> > >On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:26:13PM -0400, Hao Zhang wrote:
> > >> On 5/15/2014 12:22 PM, Maupin, Chase wrote:
> > >> >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> >> From: Shilimkar, Santosh
> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 11:14 AM
> > >> >> To: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > >> >> Cc: Maupin, Chase; Zhang, Hao; Rini, Tom; meta-
> > >ti at yoctoproject.org
> > >> >> Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and K2E
> > >boot
> > >> >> monitor build support
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Thursday 15 May 2014 12:11 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > >> >>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:06:15PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>>> On Thursday 15 May 2014 11:56 AM, Maupin, Chase wrote:
> > >> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >> >>>>>> From: Shilimkar, Santosh
> > >> >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 10:39 AM
> > >> >>>>>> To: Zhang, Hao; Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > >> >>>>>> Cc: Maupin, Chase; Rini, Tom; meta-ti at yoctoproject.org
> > >> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and
> > >K2E
> > >> >> boot
> > >> >>>>>> monitor build support
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> On Thursday 15 May 2014 11:07 AM, Hao Zhang wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>> On 5/15/2014 10:54 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:41:52AM -0400, Hao Zhang
> > >wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> [..]
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Can you clarify if you really want all 3 devices
> > >> >> installed
> > >> >>>>>> all the time or
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> do you really want a recipe that installs the boot
> > >> >> monitor
> > >> >>>>>> per device?  I
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> know you don't currently have 3 machine types so
> > >maybe
> > >> >> that
> > >> >>>>>> is what is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> feeding your issue here, but my question is whether
> > >you
> > >> >> need
> > >> >>>>>> to have
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> separate builds per device.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> I want all the 3 boot monitors built and installed all
> > >the
> > >> >>>>>> time in one
> > >> >>>>>>>>> recipe, since MCSDK 3.1 supports all the 3 Keystone II
> > >> >> devices
> > >> >>>>>> in the
> > >> >>>>>>>>> same release package. This applies to the U-boot (3 U-
> > >boot
> > >> >>>>>> build for all
> > >> >>>>>>>>> the 3 Keystone II devices) and Linux kernel DTB.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Linux kernel has support for board variations through
> > >DTBs,
> > >> >>>>>> obviously.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> As of U-boot, in Sitara world we had to manage board
> > >> >> variations
> > >> >>>>>> by detecting
> > >> >>>>>>>> the board at runtime. So, the same single binary would
> > >work
> > >> >> on
> > >> >>>>>> AM335x-EVM,
> > >> >>>>>>>> AM335x-SK, BeagleBone White and BeagleBone Black.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> I would recommend you working with Tom Rini and doing
> > >it
> > >> >>>>>> similarly, so you
> > >> >>>>>>>> don't have to build 3 different binaries for 3 slightly
> > >> >>>>>> different Keystone
> > >> >>>>>>>> baords...
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Three boars for same SOC is different than 3 different
> > >SOCs
> > >> >> with
> > >> >>>>>> their
> > >> >>>>>> own boards. We need to support different u-boot configs
> > >for
> > >> >> that.
> > >> >>>>>> And
> > >> >>>>>> upstream of the patches work is already in progress with
> > >Tom
> > >> >>>>>> reviewing
> > >> >>>>>> the patches.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> So which one is it?  Is this a case of three boards for a
> > >> >> single SoC or 3 SoCs with their own boards?
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>> I was just saying you AM example was multiple board for 1
> > >SOC.
> > >> >> What Hao is talking
> > >> >>>> '3 SOCs with their own boards.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> If those are 3 different SOCs (not just spins or diff part
> > >#s),
> > >> >> then we should
> > >> >>> consider creating 3 different OE machine configs.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >> yes they are 3 different SOCs with different capabilities
> > >> >
> > >> > Then Denys is right.  We should have 3 different OE machine
> > >configs which all share an SOC_FAMILY of "keystone".  That way
> > >they can re-use as much as possible, but unique differences such
> > >as the bootloader, example apps, etc can be easily handled.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Can you show me an example how to do that?
> > >
> > >meta-ti layer, conf/machine for machine configs and
> > >conf/machine/include for
> > >SOC configs.
> > >
> > >examples would be:
> > >
> > >- am335x-evm.conf and beaglebone.conf both use ti33x.inc SOC
> > >definition
> > >- dra7xx-evm.conf and omap5-evm.conf both use omap-a15.inc SOC
> > 
> > Denys,
> > 
> > Is there something outstanding here?  Does this patch need to be revamped 
> > now that we have individual machine types?
> 
> Yes, indeed. This recipe should build boot-monitor for current ${MACHINE} and 
> not all 3 of them together. Similar to kernel and u-boot.
> 
> -- 
> Denys
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> meta-ti mailing list
> meta-ti at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti