[Buildroot] [PATCH 0/2] Initial support for Panda and PandaES

[Buildroot] [PATCH 0/2] Initial support for Panda and PandaES

[Nicolas Dechesne]

Here is an attempt to add support for TI PandaBoard and PandaBoard ES.

Because we want to deprecate x-loader in favor of u-boot SPL:
- my first patch adds support for SPL in BR
- SPL is enabled by default in my panda config.

Both Panda and PandaES have been tested, detection is done at run time
in uboot and kernel, so we can have 1 configuration only.

I've used DEVTMPFS by default, as 1) I generally prefer this, and 2) ttyO
was missing from the generic dev table... 

Nicolas Dechesne (2):
  Add support for U-Boot SPL
  Initial support for PandaBoard and PandaBoard ES

 boot/uboot/Config.in         |    6 ++++++
 boot/uboot/uboot.mk          |    4 ++++
 configs/pandaboard_defconfig |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 configs/pandaboard_defconfig

-- 
1.7.8.3

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] Add support for U-Boot SPL

[Nicolas Dechesne]

SPL is a first stage bootloader. On pandaboard it supercedes x-loader,
and should now be used.

- this patch ensures that either SPL or xloader can be selected
- SPL will load 'u-boot.img' instead of 'u-boot.bin, so the name
  is updated accordingly

Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <n-dechesne@ti.com>
---
 boot/uboot/Config.in |    6 ++++++
 boot/uboot/uboot.mk  |    4 ++++
 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/boot/uboot/Config.in b/boot/uboot/Config.in
index c8db9fb..1b94803 100644
--- a/boot/uboot/Config.in
+++ b/boot/uboot/Config.in
@@ -137,4 +137,10 @@ config BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_ETH1ADDR
 
 endif # BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_NETWORK
 
+config BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL
+	bool "U-Boot SPL suport"
+	depends on !BR2_TARGET_XLOADER
+	help
+	  Enable the U-Boot SPL support
+
 endif # BR2_TARGET_UBOOT
diff --git a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
index db9de8d..b327f4b 100644
--- a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
+++ b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
@@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_LDR),y)
 UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot.ldr
 else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_NAND_BIN),y)
 UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot-nand.bin
+else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL),y)
+UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot.img
 else
 UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot.bin
 endif
@@ -88,6 +90,8 @@ endef
 
 define UBOOT_INSTALL_IMAGES_CMDS
 	cp -dpf $(@D)/$(UBOOT_BIN) $(BINARIES_DIR)/
+	$(if $(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL),
+		cp -dpf $(@D)/MLO $(BINARIES_DIR)/)
 endef
 
 $(eval $(call GENTARGETS))
-- 
1.7.8.3

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] Add support for U-Boot SPL

[Thomas De Schampheleire]

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Nicolas Dechesne <n-dechesne@ti.com> wrote:
> SPL is a first stage bootloader. On pandaboard it supercedes x-loader,
> and should now be used.
>
> - this patch ensures that either SPL or xloader can be selected
> - SPL will load 'u-boot.img' instead of 'u-boot.bin, so the name
> ?is updated accordingly
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <n-dechesne@ti.com>
> ---
> ?boot/uboot/Config.in | ? ?6 ++++++
> ?boot/uboot/uboot.mk ?| ? ?4 ++++
> ?2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/boot/uboot/Config.in b/boot/uboot/Config.in
> index c8db9fb..1b94803 100644
> --- a/boot/uboot/Config.in
> +++ b/boot/uboot/Config.in
> @@ -137,4 +137,10 @@ config BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_ETH1ADDR
>
> ?endif # BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_NETWORK
>
> +config BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL
> + ? ? ? bool "U-Boot SPL suport"

typo: support

> + ? ? ? depends on !BR2_TARGET_XLOADER
> + ? ? ? help
> + ? ? ? ? Enable the U-Boot SPL support
> +
> ?endif # BR2_TARGET_UBOOT
> diff --git a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> index db9de8d..b327f4b 100644
> --- a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> +++ b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_LDR),y)
> ?UBOOT_BIN ? ? ? ? ?= u-boot.ldr
> ?else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_NAND_BIN),y)
> ?UBOOT_BIN ? ? ? ? ?= u-boot-nand.bin
> +else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL),y)
> +UBOOT_BIN ? ? ? ? ?= u-boot.img
> ?else
> ?UBOOT_BIN ? ? ? ? ?= u-boot.bin
> ?endif
> @@ -88,6 +90,8 @@ endef
>
> ?define UBOOT_INSTALL_IMAGES_CMDS
> ? ? ? ?cp -dpf $(@D)/$(UBOOT_BIN) $(BINARIES_DIR)/
> + ? ? ? $(if $(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL),
> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? cp -dpf $(@D)/MLO $(BINARIES_DIR)/)
> ?endef
>
> ?$(eval $(call GENTARGETS))
> --
> 1.7.8.3
>
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] Add support for U-Boot SPL

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On Sunday 05 February 2012 01:35:46 Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
> SPL is a first stage bootloader. On pandaboard it supercedes x-loader,
> and should now be used.
> 
> - this patch ensures that either SPL or xloader can be selected
> - SPL will load 'u-boot.img' instead of 'u-boot.bin, so the name
>   is updated accordingly

 It doesn't work well, but unfortunately I don't know how to solve it.
MLO and u-boot.img are only created for the omap configs, and only in
u-boot 2011.12 or later.  Depending on omap in the Config.in is almost
impossible, and also depending on 2011.12 is difficult because it could
be a custom git instead.

 I think the only solution is to add a check in the .mk file if MLO and
u-boot.img indeed exist, and fall back to the default instead if not.

 What is also missing is that the choice between the different image types
should depend on !BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL.

 Regards,
 Arnout

> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <n-dechesne@ti.com>
> ---
>  boot/uboot/Config.in |    6 ++++++
>  boot/uboot/uboot.mk  |    4 ++++
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/boot/uboot/Config.in b/boot/uboot/Config.in
> index c8db9fb..1b94803 100644
> --- a/boot/uboot/Config.in
> +++ b/boot/uboot/Config.in
> @@ -137,4 +137,10 @@ config BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_ETH1ADDR
>  
>  endif # BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_NETWORK
>  
> +config BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL
> +	bool "U-Boot SPL suport"
> +	depends on !BR2_TARGET_XLOADER
> +	help
> +	  Enable the U-Boot SPL support
> +
>  endif # BR2_TARGET_UBOOT
> diff --git a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> index db9de8d..b327f4b 100644
> --- a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> +++ b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_LDR),y)
>  UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot.ldr
>  else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_NAND_BIN),y)
>  UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot-nand.bin
> +else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL),y)
> +UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot.img
>  else
>  UBOOT_BIN          = u-boot.bin
>  endif
> @@ -88,6 +90,8 @@ endef
>  
>  define UBOOT_INSTALL_IMAGES_CMDS
>  	cp -dpf $(@D)/$(UBOOT_BIN) $(BINARIES_DIR)/
> +	$(if $(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL),
> +		cp -dpf $(@D)/MLO $(BINARIES_DIR)/)
>  endef
>  
>  $(eval $(call GENTARGETS))
> 

-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                               arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect                 +32-16-286540
Essensium/Mind                                     http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium                BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] Add support for U-Boot SPL

[Dechesne, Nicolas]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>wrote:

>  It doesn't work well, but unfortunately I don't know how to solve it.
> MLO and u-boot.img are only created for the omap configs, and only in
> u-boot 2011.12 or later.  Depending on omap in the Config.in is almost
> impossible, and also depending on 2011.12 is difficult because it could
> be a custom git instead.
>
> ouch. thanks for finding this out, as I didn't notice.

looking at the SPL code, it seems that SPL will parse the uboot file and
try to determine the format. if it does not find the right signature it
will assume it's raw, e.g. something a-la u-boot.bin.
so we could patch SPL to load u-boot.bin (the name used by SPL is
hardcoded). but that means that we have to carry over 1 patch and keep
rebasing it...

i don't have my board with me, atm. so i will make some tests sometimes
later.


>  I think the only solution is to add a check in the .mk file if MLO and
> u-boot.img indeed exist, and fall back to the default instead if not.
>

indeed, the u-boot.img does not seem to be created unless it's needed (e.g.
in OMAP case). so that might work.

would you accept such a solution? if so i can update my patches with that?


>
>  What is also missing is that the choice between the different image types
> should depend on !BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL.
>

sorry, i don't get this one. what do you mean?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120210/d92e5cfa/attachment.html>

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] Add support for U-Boot SPL

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On Friday 10 February 2012 19:27:52 Dechesne, Nicolas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote:
> 
> >  It doesn't work well, but unfortunately I don't know how to solve it.
> > MLO and u-boot.img are only created for the omap configs, and only in
> > u-boot 2011.12 or later.  Depending on omap in the Config.in is almost
> > impossible, and also depending on 2011.12 is difficult because it could
> > be a custom git instead.
> >
> ouch. thanks for finding this out, as I didn't notice.
> 
> looking at the SPL code, it seems that SPL will parse the uboot file and
> try to determine the format. if it does not find the right signature it
> will assume it's raw, e.g. something a-la u-boot.bin.
> so we could patch SPL to load u-boot.bin (the name used by SPL is
> hardcoded). but that means that we have to carry over 1 patch and keep
> rebasing it...

 That doesn't sound like a very good idea, indeed.


> >  I think the only solution is to add a check in the .mk file if MLO and
> > u-boot.img indeed exist, and fall back to the default instead if not.
> >
> 
> indeed, the u-boot.img does not seem to be created unless it's needed (e.g.
> in OMAP case). so that might work.
> 
> would you accept such a solution? if so i can update my patches with that?

 I don't see why we would not accept that solution.

 However, I just saw that my remark applies to all other possible targets as
well.  It looks like the u-boot build produces just one of the possible images
(kwb, ldr, bin, -nand.bin) so the user is responsible for choosing the right
one in the config.  So I guess you can disregard my original remark.  Although
actually, I'd prefer if the BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_* options would just go
away.  The install commands can copy all of them, as far as they exist.  But
you don't have to worry about that, Nicolas.


> >  What is also missing is that the choice between the different image types
> > should depend on !BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL.
> 
> sorry, i don't get this one. what do you mean?

 There is a prompt 'U-Boot binary format' that selects which u-boot.* to
install.  If you select SPL, the binary format must be .img.  So you should
make sure that the Config.in enforces that.

 Come to think of it, you can simply make the SPL one of the binary 
formats.  It's not exactly the same, of course, because MLO is a separate
file.  But it serves the same purpose: select the binary format appropriate
for the target.  So, move the BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL config up 60 lines
so it becomes part of the binary format choice.


 Regards,
 Arnout

-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                               arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect                 +32-16-286540
Essensium/Mind                                     http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium                BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120210/40810971/attachment.html>

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] Add support for U-Boot SPL

[Dechesne, Nicolas]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>wrote:

> > > I think the only solution is to add a check in the .mk file if MLO and
>
> > > u-boot.img indeed exist, and fall back to the default instead if not.
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > indeed, the u-boot.img does not seem to be created unless it's needed
> (e.g.
>
> > in OMAP case). so that might work.
>
> >
>
> > would you accept such a solution? if so i can update my patches with
> that?
>
>
>  I don't see why we would not accept that solution.
>
>
>  However, I just saw that my remark applies to all other possible targets
> as
>
> well. It looks like the u-boot build produces just one of the possible
> images
>
> (kwb, ldr, bin, -nand.bin) so the user is responsible for choosing the
> right
>
> one in the config. So I guess you can disregard my original remark.
> Although
>
> actually, I'd prefer if the BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_* options would just go
>
> away. The install commands can copy all of them, as far as they exist. But
>
> you don't have to worry about that, Nicolas.
>

in fact I didn't realize the usage of BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_* until your
message. so i have prepared a new patch set like this:

03675f3 configs: add support for PandaBoard and PandaBoard ES
8872284 uboot: add a new binary format for u-boot.img
f2157f3 uboot: Add support for U-Boot SPL

basically first I add u-boot SPL support which ensure xloader is not used,
and copy MLO from uboot.

then I create a new UBOOT_FORMAT_IMG set to u-boot.img, which can be set
for the relevant targets.

then in the panda config I set the proper configs.

i will resent the serie shortly


> > > What is also missing is that the choice between the different image
> types
>
> > > should depend on !BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL.
>
> >
>
> > sorry, i don't get this one. what do you mean?
>
>
>  There is a prompt 'U-Boot binary format' that selects which u-boot.* to
>
> install. If you select SPL, the binary format must be .img. So you should
>
> make sure that the Config.in enforces that.
>
>
>  Come to think of it, you can simply make the SPL one of the binary
>
> formats. It's not exactly the same, of course, because MLO is a separate
>
> file. But it serves the same purpose: select the binary format appropriate
>
> for the target. So, move the BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL config up 60 lines
>
> so it becomes part of the binary format choice.
>

well, SPL is not really the format. SPL is where we load the uboot file, it
fact it would work with BIN format or IMG format. it's just that the name
is 'hardcoded' there. if we rename uboot.img uboot.bin, then it works...
when reading the file SPL will first try to detect if it's a IMG format
(looking for MAGIC number), if not it would assume a BIN format...

so really I think that adding another FORMAT is the right solution, and
that would allow other platforms to use SPL with uboot.bin if that's what
they need/want.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20120215/a22b0ff0/attachment.html>

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] Initial support for PandaBoard and PandaBoard ES

[Nicolas Dechesne]

This is a default configuration for Panda and PandaES, tested on both
platforms.

DEVTMPFS is enabled, to use static dev configuration one would need
to update the generic dev table for ttyO driver.

Panda is well supported in mainline kernel with omap2plus_defconfig,
so this should be safe.

U-boot SPL support is enabled by default as x-loader is now
deprecated.

Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dechesne <n-dechesne@ti.com>
---
 configs/pandaboard_defconfig |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 configs/pandaboard_defconfig

diff --git a/configs/pandaboard_defconfig b/configs/pandaboard_defconfig
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..64000f2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/configs/pandaboard_defconfig
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+# Architecture
+BR2_arm=y
+BR2_cortex_a9=y
+
+# system
+BR2_TARGET_GENERIC_GETTY=y
+BR2_TARGET_GENERIC_GETTY_PORT="ttyO2"
+BR2_ROOTFS_DEVICE_CREATION_DYNAMIC_DEVTMPFS=y
+
+# filesystem
+BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2=y
+# BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_TAR is not set
+
+# Kernel
+BR2_LINUX_KERNEL=y
+BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DEFCONFIG="omap2plus"
+
+# GCC
+BR2_GCC_VERSION_4_6_X=y
+
+# Bootloaders
+BR2_TARGET_UBOOT=y
+BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_BOARDNAME="omap4_panda"
+BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL=y
-- 
1.7.8.3