From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 44475E00B68; Thu, 15 May 2014 09:20:30 -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 * [192.94.94.40 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS X-Greylist: delayed 372 seconds by postgrey-1.32 at yocto-www; Thu, 15 May 2014 09:20:27 PDT Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com (unknown [192.94.94.40]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A2E2E00A44 for ; Thu, 15 May 2014 09:20:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dlelxv90.itg.ti.com ([172.17.2.17]) by arroyo.ext.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id s4FGEFpY029951 for ; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:14:15 -0500 Received: from DLEE70.ent.ti.com (dlemailx.itg.ti.com [157.170.170.113]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s4FGEFj2008859 for ; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:14:15 -0500 Received: from dflp32.itg.ti.com (10.64.6.15) by DLEE70.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:14:14 -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 s4FGEEIk025090; Thu, 15 May 2014 11:14:14 -0500 Message-ID: <5374E7D6.4010901@ti.com> Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 12:14:14 -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: Denys Dmytriyenko References: <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> <5374E5F7.2080705@ti.com> <20140515161137.GS18053@edge> In-Reply-To: <20140515161137.GS18053@edge> 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 16:20:30 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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@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