From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 3C2A1E00B1E; Thu, 15 May 2014 09:06:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RDNS_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, high * trust * [198.47.26.153 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS Received: from devils.ext.ti.com (unknown [198.47.26.153]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4017DE00975 for ; Thu, 15 May 2014 09:06:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dflxv15.itg.ti.com ([128.247.5.124]) by devils.ext.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id s4FG6Gei004620 for ; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:06:16 -0500 Received: from DFLE73.ent.ti.com (dfle73.ent.ti.com [128.247.5.110]) by dflxv15.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s4FG6GNJ011775 for ; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:06:16 -0500 Received: from dflp32.itg.ti.com (10.64.6.15) by DFLE73.ent.ti.com (128.247.5.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:06:15 -0500 Received: from [158.218.103.31] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dflp32.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s4FG6F0n018262; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:06:15 -0500 Message-ID: <5374E5F7.2080705@ti.com> Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 12:06:15 -0400 From: Santosh Shilimkar User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Maupin, Chase" , "Zhang, Hao" , "Dmytriyenko, Denys" References: <1400092189-13946-1-git-send-email-hzhang@ti.com> <20140514184018.GO18053@edge> <5373BCEB.9020808@ti.com> <20140514190101.GQ18053@edge> <7D46E86EC0A8354091174257B2FED1015D016DD6@DLEE11.ent.ti.com> <5373D442.9050706@ti.com> <7D46E86EC0A8354091174257B2FED1015D01B8F5@DLEE11.ent.ti.com> <5374D230.6090002@ti.com> <20140515145432.GR18053@edge> <5374D81B.7020909@ti.com> <5374DF89.1040105@ti.com> <7D46E86EC0A8354091174257B2FED1015D01C00A@DLEE11.ent.ti.com> In-Reply-To: <7D46E86EC0A8354091174257B2FED1015D01C00A@DLEE11.ent.ti.com> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 15 May 2014 09:22:01 -0700 Cc: "Rini, Tom" , "meta-ti@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] boot-monitor: add K2L and K2E boot monitor build support X-BeenThere: meta-ti@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-ti layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 16:06:20 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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@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. Regards, Santosh