From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Sylvain Lamontagne <sylvain.lamontagne@novariant.com>
Cc: Michel Lemieux <Michel.Lemieux@novariant.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
Craig Cornwall <craig.cornwall@novariant.com>
Subject: Re: Installation on a MPC5200 based custom board
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:12:44 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080711221244.GE18239@secretlab.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1215814074.9106.76.camel@NV10035>
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 06:07:54PM -0400, Sylvain Lamontagne wrote:
> Greetings
>
> We are currently trying to put a Kernel 2.6.26 on a custom board based
> on the MPC5200 processor and the designed of the board was based on the
> lite5200b evaluation board.
>
> We would like to have some advice regarding the installation process for
> this kernel. The hardware currently work (still buggy, but work) with a
> kernel 2.6.23 compiled with ARCH ppc running on a U-Boot 1.1.6. For what
> I understand now, the ARCH ppc if kind of deprecated and we have to
> switch to ARCH powerpc. I'm new to the concept of device tree, do I have
> to modify it myself or the file wild be generated automatically ?
You need to modify it yourself. I suspect that most of it will be
identical to the lite5200b, but you'll need to make adjustments for
things like PSC usage and PCI interrupt mappings.
> Should it be better for us to upgrade our version of U-Boot to 1.3.* to
> get the support of device tree? Currently we tried with the wrapper
> trick of using cuImage.lite5200b and the v1.1.6 but it doesn't seem to
> work.
It's a good idea, but you don't need to. The cuImage target should work
well after you've created a custom .dts file for your board.
> Also, we would like to know if we have to recompile everything on the
> board (U-Boot/Kernel/Busybox) since we switched ARCH from ppc to
> powerpc?
No, you do not.
> We are also wondering what is the cross-compilation tools that you are
> using? Or do you have any good advice on a choice? Currently we are
> building with gcc-4.1.0-glibc-2.3.6 for ppc on an x86 host running
> Ubuntu 8.04 or we also have a Fedora Core 7 laptop but, I have see a
> kernel compilation warning regarding gcc 4.1 saying that it's known to
> brake the kernel.
Personally, I use ELDK from Denx.
> Should we upgrade everything (U-Boot/Kernel/Busybox) and recreate a new
> Ramdisk ?
No, you don't have to.
> Anybody know a good development tools to use with a CodeWarrior USB TAP
> from freescale ? The CodeWarrior IDE doesn't seems to work properly for
> us.
I haven't used codewarrior for Linux development. The Abatron BDI-3000
works really well for me.
Cheers,
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-11 22:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-11 22:07 Installation on a MPC5200 based custom board Sylvain Lamontagne
2008-07-11 22:12 ` Grant Likely [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-12-05 10:47 Angelo
2008-12-05 12:20 ` Gary Thomas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080711221244.GE18239@secretlab.ca \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=Michel.Lemieux@novariant.com \
--cc=craig.cornwall@novariant.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=sylvain.lamontagne@novariant.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox