[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Ulf Samuelsson]

> Hi Thiago,

> As I understood target/device/Atmel/Linux directory should be removed, right?

> BR,
> Ivan

I'll fix it as soon as I get some spare time.
Need to update the kernel support to 2.6.23 anyway

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi,

I have removed the Linux folder and it built without (new) problems
*smile*. Tested with avr32 build.

Ulf, let me know if there is something I could do to help. Even if
it's just testing.

Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa

On Jan 8, 2008 3:33 PM, Ulf Samuelsson <ulf@atmel.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Thiago,
>
> > As I understood target/device/Atmel/Linux directory should be removed, right?
>
> > BR,
> > Ivan
>
> I'll fix it as soon as I get some spare time.
> Need to update the kernel support to 2.6.23 anyway
>
> Best Regards
> Ulf Samuelsson
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at uclibc.org
> http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi there,

   I'm trying to update the linux kernel to 2.6.23 (plus patches)
based on the Atmel buildroot fork, due to critical fixes that finally
enable booting from the sdcard on the STK1000 (which is the only
available non-network booting method). But then again, there is a big
mess in the Atmel folder. Currently we have:

   arch-avr32/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
   linux/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
   Linux/kernel-patches-2.6.2*

   And possibly others that I haven't found yet.
   Is there any reason for it? Is all of them used? Any of them
deprecated? I added the patches to arch-avr32, to find out that at the
end of the building, build_avr32/linux-2.6.23 didn't have the patches
applied. So, now I'm trying again, but this time I placed the patches
on ALL of those (still building). Is that right?

Kind Regards,
    Thiago A. Correa

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi,

   *bump*

    Ulf, I see you are back from the holidays, perhaps you could give
me a hint on this *smile*. Thanks.

Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa

On Dec 24, 2007 5:47 PM, Thiago A. Corr?a <thiago.correa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>    I'm trying to update the linux kernel to 2.6.23 (plus patches)
> based on the Atmel buildroot fork, due to critical fixes that finally
> enable booting from the sdcard on the STK1000 (which is the only
> available non-network booting method). But then again, there is a big
> mess in the Atmel folder. Currently we have:
>
>    arch-avr32/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
>    linux/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
>    Linux/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
>
>    And possibly others that I haven't found yet.
>    Is there any reason for it? Is all of them used? Any of them
> deprecated? I added the patches to arch-avr32, to find out that at the
> end of the building, build_avr32/linux-2.6.23 didn't have the patches
> applied. So, now I'm trying again, but this time I placed the patches
> on ALL of those (still building). Is that right?
>
> Kind Regards,
>     Thiago A. Correa
>

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Ulf Samuelsson]

On Dec 24, 2007 5:47 PM, Thiago A. Corr?a <thiago.correa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>    I'm trying to update the linux kernel to 2.6.23 (plus patches)
> based on the Atmel buildroot fork, due to critical fixes that finally
> enable booting from the sdcard on the STK1000 (which is the only
> available non-network booting method). But then again, there is a big
> mess in the Atmel folder. Currently we have:
>
>    arch-avr32/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
>    linux/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
>    Linux/kernel-patches-2.6.2*
>
>    And possibly others that I haven't found yet.
>    Is there any reason for it? Is all of them used? Any of them
> deprecated? I added the patches to arch-avr32, to find out that at the
> end of the building, build_avr32/linux-2.6.23 didn't have the patches
> applied. So, now I'm trying again, but this time I placed the patches
> on ALL of those (still building). Is that right?
>

The patches are applied to specific versions of Linux-X.Y.Z.W.
There is no tested patchset for 2.6.23, so none will be applied by default.
There are ways to apply the patches anyway.

"arch-arm" contains AT91 specific patches
"arch-avr" contain AVR32 specific patches
"linux" contain a merged patchset supporting both AT91 and AVR32.

The linux and Linux directories can be merged into one directory (linux).
There is one duplicated file for 2.6.20.4 which should be removed.

> Kind Regards,
>     Thiago A. Correa
>


Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi Ulf,

> The patches are applied to specific versions of Linux-X.Y.Z.W.
> There is no tested patchset for 2.6.23, so none will be applied by default.
> There are ways to apply the patches anyway.

There is the .23 patches from avr32linux.org, which are going to the
mainstream upcomming .24 afaik (there are even .24 patches in the
avr32linux kernel mailling list already).
For STK1000 users an upgrade is critical since it's impossible to boot
(without network) with previous versions due to a bug in the MMC
system.

Anyway, I'm trying to update the build to allow me to select .23. I've
done that, but then the patches are never applied. I have created
folders in arch-avr like the ones already there, but it didn't work.
It only applied when I used the menuconfig to specify a custom patch.
Where in the makefiles does it applies patches from arch-avr and
arch-arm? I haven't found it yet :(

> "arch-arm" contains AT91 specific patches
> "arch-avr" contain AVR32 specific patches
> "linux" contain a merged patchset supporting both AT91 and AVR32.
>
> The linux and Linux directories can be merged into one directory (linux).
> There is one duplicated file for 2.6.20.4 which should be removed.
>

I have named the folder arch-avr32/kernel-patches-2.6.23
Should it be kernel-patches-2.6.23.0?
Usually the same patch applies to all minor versions, (ie: 2.6.22.0 to
2.6.22.10), how does one express that?

Also, there is one called Linux (with capital L). There is a set of
patches in there. Should that be removed? If so, could you svn rm
them, to avoid the confusion and clutter?

Kind Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

> I have named the folder arch-avr32/kernel-patches-2.6.23
> Should it be kernel-patches-2.6.23.0?
> Usually the same patch applies to all minor versions, (ie: 2.6.22.0 to
> 2.6.22.10), how does one express that?

Replying to myself, yes, it should be called kernel-patches-2.6.23.0
to apply. The other issues are still open though, such as the
apparently unused Linux folder :(

Ulf, anyone?

Kind Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa

[Buildroot] The target/device/Atmel mess

[Ivan Kuten]

Thiago A. Corr?a wrote:
>> I have named the folder arch-avr32/kernel-patches-2.6.23
>> Should it be kernel-patches-2.6.23.0?
>> Usually the same patch applies to all minor versions, (ie: 2.6.22.0 to
>> 2.6.22.10), how does one express that?
> 
> Replying to myself, yes, it should be called kernel-patches-2.6.23.0
> to apply. The other issues are still open though, such as the
> apparently unused Linux folder :(
> 
> Ulf, anyone?
> 
> Kind Regards,
>    Thiago A. Correa
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at uclibc.org
> http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot


Hi Thiago,

As I understood target/device/Atmel/Linux directory should be removed, right?

BR,
Ivan