* meta-sunxi maintained? @ 2019-05-27 14:49 Belisko Marek 2019-05-27 15:44 ` Enrico 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-27 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: yocto, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Cc: Enrico, slapin, aguirre.nicolas Hello, I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer if necessary. Thanks a lot. BR, marek -- as simple and primitive as possible ------------------------------------------------- Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA Freelance Developer Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic Tel: +421 915 052 184 skype: marekwhite twitter: #opennandra web: http://open-nandra.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-27 14:49 meta-sunxi maintained? Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-27 15:44 ` Enrico 2019-05-27 17:32 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Enrico @ 2019-05-27 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Belisko Marek Cc: yocto, Sergey Lapin, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi, i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for all the supported boards. Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. Thanks for the help! Enrico On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer > if necessary. Thanks a lot. > > BR, > > marek > > -- > as simple and primitive as possible > ------------------------------------------------- > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA > Freelance Developer > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic > Tel: +421 915 052 184 > skype: marekwhite > twitter: #opennandra > web: http://open-nandra.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-27 15:44 ` Enrico @ 2019-05-27 17:32 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 8:31 ` Maciej Pijanowski 2019-05-28 9:01 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 0 siblings, 2 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-27 17:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Cc: yocto, Sergey Lapin, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Enrico, On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing > on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for > all the supported boards. > Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the > rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. > > Thanks for the help! > > Enrico Marek > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed > > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable > > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is > > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I > > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards > > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer > > if necessary. Thanks a lot. > > > > BR, > > > > marek > > > > -- > > as simple and primitive as possible > > ------------------------------------------------- > > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA > > Freelance Developer > > > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic > > Tel: +421 915 052 184 > > skype: marekwhite > > twitter: #opennandra > > web: http://open-nandra.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-27 17:32 ` Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-28 8:31 ` Maciej Pijanowski 2019-05-28 9:53 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 9:01 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Maciej Pijanowski @ 2019-05-28 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: yocto; +Cc: Piotr Król [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2592 bytes --] On 27.05.2019 19:32, Belisko Marek wrote: > Hi Enrico, Hi, > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing >> on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for >> all the supported boards. >> Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the >> rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. > Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. > Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. >> Thanks for the help! >> >> Enrico > Marek >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed >>> to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable >>> (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is >>> 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I >>> think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards >>> with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer >>> if necessary. Thanks a lot. I think I have some of the dirty code for integration of the recent Mali blobs with the mainline kernel as described here: https://bootlin.com/blog/more-opengl-binaries-for-the-mali-support-on-allwinner-platforms-with-mainline-linux/ We were testing Qt + Wayland on mainline Linux IIRC. Let me know if you think this could be beneficial to the community. We are not actively using at the moment, though. meta-sunxi was not that active when we worked on that so maybe we were not motivated enough to polish things up and submit a PR. We use orange-pi-zero as a base for our product we use for on-hardware validation: https://3mdeb.com/products/open-source-hardware/rte/ so I believe we can help with maintenance of this platform / SoC (we use meta-sunxi for building images for it: https://github.com/3mdeb/meta-rte). We have quite a number of other Allwinner platforms as well (H3 and A20 mostly). >>> >>> BR, >>> >>> marek >>> >>> -- >>> as simple and primitive as possible >>> ------------------------------------------------- >>> Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA >>> Freelance Developer >>> >>> Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic >>> Tel: +421 915 052 184 >>> skype: marekwhite >>> twitter: #opennandra >>> web: http://open-nandra.com -- Maciej Pijanowski Embedded Systems Engineer https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 817 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-28 8:31 ` Maciej Pijanowski @ 2019-05-28 9:53 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-28 9:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Maciej Pijanowski; +Cc: yocto, Piotr Król Hi Maciej, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:48 AM Maciej Pijanowski <maciej.pijanowski@3mdeb.com> wrote: > > > On 27.05.2019 19:32, Belisko Marek wrote: > > Hi Enrico, > Hi, > > > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing > >> on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for > >> all the supported boards. > >> Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the > >> rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. > > Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. > > Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. > >> Thanks for the help! > >> > >> Enrico > > Marek > >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed > >>> to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable > >>> (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is > >>> 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I > >>> think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards > >>> with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer > >>> if necessary. Thanks a lot. > I think I have some of the dirty code for integration of the recent Mali > blobs > with the mainline kernel as described here: > https://bootlin.com/blog/more-opengl-binaries-for-the-mali-support-on-allwinner-platforms-with-mainline-linux/ > We were testing Qt + Wayland on mainline Linux IIRC. > Let me know if you think this could be beneficial to the community. > We are not actively using at the moment, though. meta-sunxi was not that > active when we worked on > that so maybe we were not motivated enough to polish things up and > submit a PR. Sure. Pls submit PR. Have you seen recent discussion: https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144#issuecomment-496408159 ? Does your work use the same components or? Thanks. > > We use orange-pi-zero as a base for our product we use for on-hardware > validation: > https://3mdeb.com/products/open-source-hardware/rte/ so I believe we can > help > with maintenance of this platform / SoC (we use meta-sunxi for building > images for it: > https://github.com/3mdeb/meta-rte). > We have quite a number of other Allwinner platforms as well (H3 and A20 > mostly). That would be cool. I plan to spend some time on co-maintaining meta-sunxi so I hope feedback and merging will be much smoother ;) > > >>> > >>> BR, > >>> > >>> marek > >>> > >>> -- > >>> as simple and primitive as possible > >>> ------------------------------------------------- > >>> Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA > >>> Freelance Developer > >>> > >>> Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic > >>> Tel: +421 915 052 184 > >>> skype: marekwhite > >>> twitter: #opennandra > >>> web: http://open-nandra.com > > -- > Maciej Pijanowski > Embedded Systems Engineer > https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto BR, marek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-27 17:32 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 8:31 ` Maciej Pijanowski @ 2019-05-28 9:01 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-28 9:49 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek 1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-28 9:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Belisko Marek Cc: yocto, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2421 bytes --] Hi Belisko, you can also have a look in to this layer: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-allwinner-hx/ It's for allwinner H2,H3 and H5 boards that already have support on Armbian. Pretty much is just a Yocto layer with all the patches and BSP support from Armbian. It supports 4.14 and 4.19 mainline kernels only and also the PREEMPT-RT patches. Warrior support was added recently, too. A similar one is also this: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-nanopi-neo4/ Dimitris On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:33 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Enrico, > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing > > on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for > > all the supported boards. > > Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the > > rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. > Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. > Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. > > > > Thanks for the help! > > > > Enrico > > Marek > > > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed > > > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable > > > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is > > > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I > > > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards > > > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer > > > if necessary. Thanks a lot. > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > marek > > > > > > -- > > > as simple and primitive as possible > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA > > > Freelance Developer > > > > > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic > > > Tel: +421 915 052 184 > > > skype: marekwhite > > > twitter: #opennandra > > > web: http://open-nandra.com > -- > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3663 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-28 9:01 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-28 9:49 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-28 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: yocto, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:01 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Belisko, > > you can also have a look in to this layer: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-allwinner-hx/ > It's for allwinner H2,H3 and H5 boards that already have support on Armbian. > Pretty much is just a Yocto layer with all the patches and BSP support from Armbian. > It supports 4.14 and 4.19 mainline kernels only and also the PREEMPT-RT patches. > Warrior support was added recently, too. OK thanks. I think I'll stick with meta-sunxi ;). What about join forces and maintains one layer properly instead having it separated? > > A similar one is also this: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-nanopi-neo4/ > > Dimitris > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:33 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Enrico, >> >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing >> > on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for >> > all the supported boards. >> > Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the >> > rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. >> Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. >> Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. >> > >> > Thanks for the help! >> > >> > Enrico >> >> Marek >> > >> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hello, >> > > >> > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed >> > > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable >> > > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is >> > > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I >> > > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards >> > > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer >> > > if necessary. Thanks a lot. >> > > >> > > BR, >> > > >> > > marek >> > > >> > > -- >> > > as simple and primitive as possible >> > > ------------------------------------------------- >> > > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA >> > > Freelance Developer >> > > >> > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic >> > > Tel: +421 915 052 184 >> > > skype: marekwhite >> > > twitter: #opennandra >> > > web: http://open-nandra.com >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> yocto mailing list >> yocto@yoctoproject.org >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto marek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained? @ 2019-05-28 9:49 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-28 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: yocto, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:01 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Belisko, > > you can also have a look in to this layer: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-allwinner-hx/ > It's for allwinner H2,H3 and H5 boards that already have support on Armbian. > Pretty much is just a Yocto layer with all the patches and BSP support from Armbian. > It supports 4.14 and 4.19 mainline kernels only and also the PREEMPT-RT patches. > Warrior support was added recently, too. OK thanks. I think I'll stick with meta-sunxi ;). What about join forces and maintains one layer properly instead having it separated? > > A similar one is also this: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-nanopi-neo4/ > > Dimitris > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:33 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Enrico, >> >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing >> > on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for >> > all the supported boards. >> > Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the >> > rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. >> Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. >> Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. >> > >> > Thanks for the help! >> > >> > Enrico >> >> Marek >> > >> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hello, >> > > >> > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed >> > > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable >> > > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is >> > > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I >> > > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards >> > > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer >> > > if necessary. Thanks a lot. >> > > >> > > BR, >> > > >> > > marek >> > > >> > > -- >> > > as simple and primitive as possible >> > > ------------------------------------------------- >> > > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA >> > > Freelance Developer >> > > >> > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic >> > > Tel: +421 915 052 184 >> > > skype: marekwhite >> > > twitter: #opennandra >> > > web: http://open-nandra.com >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> yocto mailing list >> yocto@yoctoproject.org >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto marek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-28 9:49 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek (?) @ 2019-05-28 10:05 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-28 10:11 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek -1 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-28 10:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Belisko Marek Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4639 bytes --] Hi Belisko, I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. I hope this explains your question and even more that explains that was not a decision to divide things or create more hassle for the same chips. Regards, Dimitris Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 28. Mai 2019, 11:49: > Hi Dimitris, > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:01 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Belisko, > > > > you can also have a look in to this layer: > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-allwinner-hx/ > > It's for allwinner H2,H3 and H5 boards that already have support on > Armbian. > > Pretty much is just a Yocto layer with all the patches and BSP support > from Armbian. > > It supports 4.14 and 4.19 mainline kernels only and also the PREEMPT-RT > patches. > > Warrior support was added recently, too. > OK thanks. I think I'll stick with meta-sunxi ;). What about join > forces and maintains one layer properly instead having it separated? > > > > A similar one is also this: > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-nanopi-neo4/ > > > > Dimitris > > > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:33 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Enrico, > >> > >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing > >> > on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for > >> > all the supported boards. > >> > Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the > >> > rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. > >> Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. > >> Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. > >> > > >> > Thanks for the help! > >> > > >> > Enrico > >> > >> Marek > >> > > >> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek < > marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Hello, > >> > > > >> > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was > contributed > >> > > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable > >> > > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There > is > >> > > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I > >> > > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards > >> > > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as > co-maintainer > >> > > if necessary. Thanks a lot. > >> > > > >> > > BR, > >> > > > >> > > marek > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > as simple and primitive as possible > >> > > ------------------------------------------------- > >> > > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA > >> > > Freelance Developer > >> > > > >> > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic > >> > > Tel: +421 915 052 184 > >> > > skype: marekwhite > >> > > twitter: #opennandra > >> > > web: http://open-nandra.com > >> -- > >> _______________________________________________ > >> yocto mailing list > >> yocto@yoctoproject.org > >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto > > > > marek > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6738 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-28 10:05 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-28 10:11 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-28 10:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Belisko, > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. > > I hope this explains your question and even more that explains that was not a decision to divide things or create more hassle for the same chips. Yes certainly. Thanks for great explanation and sorry if I wrote it in not polite way I didn't mean to offence ;). Thanks. > > Regards, > Dimitris > > Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 28. Mai 2019, 11:49: >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:01 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Belisko, >> > >> > you can also have a look in to this layer: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-allwinner-hx/ >> > It's for allwinner H2,H3 and H5 boards that already have support on Armbian. >> > Pretty much is just a Yocto layer with all the patches and BSP support from Armbian. >> > It supports 4.14 and 4.19 mainline kernels only and also the PREEMPT-RT patches. >> > Warrior support was added recently, too. >> OK thanks. I think I'll stick with meta-sunxi ;). What about join >> forces and maintains one layer properly instead having it separated? >> > >> > A similar one is also this: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-nanopi-neo4/ >> > >> > Dimitris >> > >> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:33 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Enrico, >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing >> >> > on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for >> >> > all the supported boards. >> >> > Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the >> >> > rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. >> >> Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. >> >> Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > Thanks for the help! >> >> > >> >> > Enrico >> >> >> >> Marek >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > Hello, >> >> > > >> >> > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed >> >> > > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable >> >> > > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is >> >> > > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I >> >> > > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards >> >> > > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer >> >> > > if necessary. Thanks a lot. >> >> > > >> >> > > BR, >> >> > > >> >> > > marek >> >> > > >> >> > > -- >> >> > > as simple and primitive as possible >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------- >> >> > > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA >> >> > > Freelance Developer >> >> > > >> >> > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic >> >> > > Tel: +421 915 052 184 >> >> > > skype: marekwhite >> >> > > twitter: #opennandra >> >> > > web: http://open-nandra.com >> >> -- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> yocto mailing list >> >> yocto@yoctoproject.org >> >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto >> >> >> >> marek BR, marek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained? @ 2019-05-28 10:11 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-28 10:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Belisko, > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. > > I hope this explains your question and even more that explains that was not a decision to divide things or create more hassle for the same chips. Yes certainly. Thanks for great explanation and sorry if I wrote it in not polite way I didn't mean to offence ;). Thanks. > > Regards, > Dimitris > > Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 28. Mai 2019, 11:49: >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:01 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Belisko, >> > >> > you can also have a look in to this layer: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-allwinner-hx/ >> > It's for allwinner H2,H3 and H5 boards that already have support on Armbian. >> > Pretty much is just a Yocto layer with all the patches and BSP support from Armbian. >> > It supports 4.14 and 4.19 mainline kernels only and also the PREEMPT-RT patches. >> > Warrior support was added recently, too. >> OK thanks. I think I'll stick with meta-sunxi ;). What about join >> forces and maintains one layer properly instead having it separated? >> > >> > A similar one is also this: http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-nanopi-neo4/ >> > >> > Dimitris >> > >> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:33 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Enrico, >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:44 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > i try to keep it maintained, but now i just have a lime2 for testing >> >> > on real hardware, and i don't have the resources to do test builds for >> >> > all the supported boards. >> >> > Your help would be welcome, i can't check right now if i have the >> >> > rights to add you as co-maintainer, anyway i will add you. >> >> Thanks I have few sunxi based boards so can do tests also on my setup. >> >> Pls ping me when you will add me. Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > Thanks for the help! >> >> > >> >> > Enrico >> >> >> >> Marek >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 4:50 PM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > Hello, >> >> > > >> >> > > I'm just curious if meta-sunxi is still maintained? I was contributed >> >> > > to layer back while and when look now thud branch is un-compilable >> >> > > (dri2proto not replaced) and warrior branch not created yet. There is >> >> > > 14 issues + 6 pending pull requests. Added maintainers also in CC. I >> >> > > think it would be good to have sunxi properly maintained as boards >> >> > > with sunxi processors are popular. I can give a hand as co-maintainer >> >> > > if necessary. Thanks a lot. >> >> > > >> >> > > BR, >> >> > > >> >> > > marek >> >> > > >> >> > > -- >> >> > > as simple and primitive as possible >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------- >> >> > > Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA >> >> > > Freelance Developer >> >> > > >> >> > > Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic >> >> > > Tel: +421 915 052 184 >> >> > > skype: marekwhite >> >> > > twitter: #opennandra >> >> > > web: http://open-nandra.com >> >> -- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> yocto mailing list >> >> yocto@yoctoproject.org >> >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto >> >> >> >> marek BR, marek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-28 10:11 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek (?) @ 2019-05-28 10:56 ` Enrico 2019-05-28 11:06 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos -1 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Enrico @ 2019-05-28 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Belisko Marek Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > > > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > > > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. It would be great to integrate all those different layers in meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these different configurations. Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will be removed. One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. Enrico ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-28 10:56 ` Enrico @ 2019-05-28 11:06 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-29 6:36 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-28 11:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Cc: Sergey Lapin, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list, Yocto discussion list [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3366 bytes --] Hi Enrico, I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. Regards, Dimitris On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in > meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is > great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which > is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their > patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way > the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new > patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use > of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no > doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that > decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't > like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. > Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those > things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > > > > > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And > after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the > beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the > way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > > > > > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches > are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together > would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the > different approach. > > It would be great to integrate all those different layers in > meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own > bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these > different configurations. > Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have > the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier > to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. > > But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst > thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will > be removed. > > One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers > linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. > > Enrico > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3942 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-28 11:06 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-29 6:36 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-29 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Enrico, > > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. > > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. > > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. > > Regards, > Dimitris > > Marek > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >> > > >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >> > > >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >> >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >> different configurations. >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >> >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >> be removed. >> >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >> >> Enrico ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained? @ 2019-05-29 6:36 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-29 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Enrico, > > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. > > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. > > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. > > Regards, > Dimitris > > Marek > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >> > > >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >> > > >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >> >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >> different configurations. >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >> >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >> be removed. >> >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >> >> Enrico ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-29 6:36 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek (?) @ 2019-05-29 7:03 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-29 7:39 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek -1 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-29 7:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Belisko Marek Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4958 bytes --] Hi Marek, that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. Regards, Dimitris Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: > Hi Dimitris, > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Enrico, > > > > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. > Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this > layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too > much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a > mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to > fit the armbian in the layer. > > > > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind > of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my > side I'm all in. > > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes > maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is > much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. > I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali > for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. > > > > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows > for that integration. > > > > Regards, > > Dimitris > > > > > Marek > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos < > dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > > > >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in > meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is > great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which > is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their > patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way > the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new > patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use > of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no > doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that > decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't > like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. > Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those > things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > >> > > > >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And > after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the > beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the > way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > >> > > > >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian > patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all > together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the > different approach. > >> > >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in > >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own > >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these > >> different configurations. > >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have > >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier > >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. > >> > >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst > >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will > >> be removed. > >> > >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers > >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. > >> > >> Enrico > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6056 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-29 7:03 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-29 7:39 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-29 7:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but without any success. Also pls look at this communication: https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. > > Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. > > I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. > > Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. > > Regards, > Dimitris BR, marek > > Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Enrico, >> > >> > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. >> > >> > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. >> > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. >> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali >> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. >> > >> > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Dimitris >> > >> > >> Marek >> > >> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >> >> > > >> >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >> >> > > >> >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >> >> >> >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >> >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >> >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >> >> different configurations. >> >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >> >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >> >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >> >> >> >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >> >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >> >> be removed. >> >> >> >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >> >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >> >> >> >> Enrico ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained? @ 2019-05-29 7:39 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-29 7:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but without any success. Also pls look at this communication: https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. > > Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. > > I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. > > Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. > > Regards, > Dimitris BR, marek > > Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Enrico, >> > >> > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. >> > >> > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. >> > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. >> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali >> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. >> > >> > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Dimitris >> > >> > >> Marek >> > >> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >> >> > > >> >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >> >> > > >> >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >> >> >> >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >> >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >> >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >> >> different configurations. >> >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >> >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >> >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >> >> >> >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >> >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >> >> be removed. >> >> >> >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >> >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >> >> >> >> Enrico ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-29 7:39 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek (?) @ 2019-05-29 8:03 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-29 8:17 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek -1 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-29 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Belisko Marek Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7011 bytes --] Hi Marek, I see (and now remember) that there is a recipe for libgles for Mali400 and A10/20. Are you interested for this architecture or newer (like H2, H3, H5) ? I can only make a wild guess that maybe because the driver is a bit old, then if you try to build new recipes then there might be some issues. This also is the difference between the layers that I've mentioned before. The meta-sunxi is clean and raw layer. Meaning that you get more flexibility to add/remove things and also have a more generic layer. On the other hand, the other layer is not really configurable and flexible in the same depth but it takes the full armbian distro and wraps it. So, if the distro works, then the layer should work only with those components (of course you can do modifications). That's the difference in the approach I meant in the previous mail. I don't have any A10/20 hardware to test, but I could spin a build and look at the errors you get. If you send my your local conf file and your environment setup and build command I ca trigger a build and see if there's anything I can help with. Regards, Dimitris On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:39 AM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dimitris, > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment > and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this > by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've > done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've > learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the > open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the > beginning. > You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + > libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package > to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation > gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but > without any success. Also pls look at this communication: > https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we > can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. > > > > Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to > re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to > stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. > > > > I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should > already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to > create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. > > > > Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit > to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which > will help to short the time and effort to do that. > > > > Regards, > > Dimitris > > BR, > > marek > > > > Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, > 08:37: > >> > >> Hi Dimitris, > >> > >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi Enrico, > >> > > >> > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. > Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this > layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too > much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a > mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to > fit the armbian in the layer. > >> > > >> > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such > kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then > from my side I'm all in. > >> > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes > maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is > much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. > >> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali > >> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. > >> > > >> > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows > for that integration. > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > Dimitris > >> > > >> > > >> Marek > >> > > >> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico < > ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos < > dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in > meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is > great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which > is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their > patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way > the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new > patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use > of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no > doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that > decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't > like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. > Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those > things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. > And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the > beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the > way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian > patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all > together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the > different approach. > >> >> > >> >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in > >> >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own > >> >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these > >> >> different configurations. > >> >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have > >> >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier > >> >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. > >> >> > >> >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst > >> >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will > >> >> be removed. > >> >> > >> >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers > >> >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. > >> >> > >> >> Enrico > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8647 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-29 8:03 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos @ 2019-05-29 8:17 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-29 8:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 10:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > I see (and now remember) that there is a recipe for libgles for Mali400 and A10/20. > Are you interested for this architecture or newer (like H2, H3, H5) ? > > I can only make a wild guess that maybe because the driver is a bit old, then if you > try to build new recipes then there might be some issues. > > This also is the difference between the layers that I've mentioned before. The meta-sunxi > is clean and raw layer. Meaning that you get more flexibility to add/remove things and > also have a more generic layer. On the other hand, the other layer is not really configurable > and flexible in the same depth but it takes the full armbian distro and wraps it. So, if the > distro works, then the layer should work only with those components (of course you can > do modifications). That's the difference in the approach I meant in the previous mail. > > I don't have any A10/20 hardware to test, but I could spin a build and look at the errors you get. > If you send my your local conf file and your environment setup and build command I ca > trigger a build and see if there's anything I can help with. Thanks it will be really helpful. Basically I'm doing same as described here: https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/240#issuecomment-496410993 Looking at sunxi-mali more devices should be supported: COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(sun4i|sun5i|sun7i|sun8i)" > > Regards, > Dimitris BR, marek > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:39 AM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Marek, >> > >> > that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. >> You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + >> libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package >> to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation >> gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but >> without any success. Also pls look at this communication: >> https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we >> can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. >> > >> > Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. >> > >> > I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. >> > >> > Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Dimitris >> >> BR, >> >> marek >> > >> > Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: >> >> >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi Enrico, >> >> > >> >> > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. >> >> > >> >> > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. >> >> > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. >> >> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali >> >> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. >> >> > >> >> > Regards, >> >> > Dimitris >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Marek >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >> >> >> >> >> >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >> >> >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >> >> >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >> >> >> different configurations. >> >> >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >> >> >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >> >> >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >> >> >> >> >> >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >> >> >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >> >> >> be removed. >> >> >> >> >> >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >> >> >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >> >> >> >> >> >> Enrico ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained? @ 2019-05-29 8:17 ` Belisko Marek 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-29 8:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dimitris Tassopoulos Cc: Yocto discussion list, Sergey Lapin, Enrico, Nicolas Aguirre, OpenEmbedded Development mailing list Hi Dimitris, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 10:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > I see (and now remember) that there is a recipe for libgles for Mali400 and A10/20. > Are you interested for this architecture or newer (like H2, H3, H5) ? > > I can only make a wild guess that maybe because the driver is a bit old, then if you > try to build new recipes then there might be some issues. > > This also is the difference between the layers that I've mentioned before. The meta-sunxi > is clean and raw layer. Meaning that you get more flexibility to add/remove things and > also have a more generic layer. On the other hand, the other layer is not really configurable > and flexible in the same depth but it takes the full armbian distro and wraps it. So, if the > distro works, then the layer should work only with those components (of course you can > do modifications). That's the difference in the approach I meant in the previous mail. > > I don't have any A10/20 hardware to test, but I could spin a build and look at the errors you get. > If you send my your local conf file and your environment setup and build command I ca > trigger a build and see if there's anything I can help with. Thanks it will be really helpful. Basically I'm doing same as described here: https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/240#issuecomment-496410993 Looking at sunxi-mali more devices should be supported: COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(sun4i|sun5i|sun7i|sun8i)" > > Regards, > Dimitris BR, marek > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:39 AM Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Marek, >> > >> > that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. >> You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + >> libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package >> to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation >> gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but >> without any success. Also pls look at this communication: >> https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we >> can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. >> > >> > Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. >> > >> > I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. >> > >> > Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Dimitris >> >> BR, >> >> marek >> > >> > Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: >> >> >> >> Hi Dimitris, >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi Enrico, >> >> > >> >> > I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. >> >> > >> >> > If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. >> >> > I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. >> >> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali >> >> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. >> >> > >> >> > Regards, >> >> > Dimitris >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Marek >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >> >> >> >> >> >> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >> >> >> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >> >> >> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >> >> >> different configurations. >> >> >> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >> >> >> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >> >> >> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >> >> >> >> >> >> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >> >> >> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >> >> >> be removed. >> >> >> >> >> >> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >> >> >> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >> >> >> >> >> >> Enrico ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-29 7:39 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek (?) (?) @ 2019-05-29 8:38 ` Maciej Pijanowski 2019-05-29 11:23 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-31 6:47 ` Belisko Marek -1 siblings, 2 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Maciej Pijanowski @ 2019-05-29 8:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: yocto [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6446 bytes --] On 29.05.2019 09:39, Belisko Marek wrote: > Hi Dimitris, > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Marek, >> >> that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. > You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + > libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package > to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation > gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but > without any success. Also pls look at this communication: > https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we > can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. What are you trying to achieve? Which kernel version are you using? Isn't the mali recipe in meta-sunxi quite dated already? Can it work with mainline kernel correctly? I would suggest to try the recent blobs as described in this post: https://bootlin.com/blog/mali-opengl-support-on-allwinner-platforms-with-mainline-linux/ As I've written previously, I have been using the Wayland / Qt with good performance on H3 using the mainline kernel. Is it something you are looking for? You can take a look at my dirty branch - maybe this will be any help: https://github.com/3mdeb/meta-sunxi/tree/weston-with-kms/recipes-graphics/mali Unfortunately, I had stopped working on that and presently do not have much time to clean up / get back to it. I can provide some support and / or get back to it if it seems valuable and there is some interest. >> Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. >> >> I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. >> >> Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. >> >> Regards, >> Dimitris > BR, > > marek >> Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: >>> Hi Dimitris, >>> >>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Enrico, >>>> >>>> I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. >>>> >>>> If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. >>>> I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. >>> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali >>> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. >>>> Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Dimitris >>>> >>>> >>> Marek >>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >>>>> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >>>>> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >>>>> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >>>>> different configurations. >>>>> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >>>>> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >>>>> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >>>>> >>>>> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >>>>> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >>>>> be removed. >>>>> >>>>> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >>>>> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >>>>> >>>>> Enrico -- Maciej Pijanowski Embedded Systems Engineer https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 817 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-29 8:38 ` Maciej Pijanowski @ 2019-05-29 11:23 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-31 6:47 ` Belisko Marek 1 sibling, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-29 11:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Maciej Pijanowski; +Cc: yocto Hi Maciej, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 1:08 PM Maciej Pijanowski <maciej.pijanowski@3mdeb.com> wrote: > > > On 29.05.2019 09:39, Belisko Marek wrote: > > Hi Dimitris, > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Marek, > >> > >> that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. > > You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + > > libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package > > to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation > > gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but > > without any success. Also pls look at this communication: > > https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we > > can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. > What are you trying to achieve? Which kernel version are you using? > Isn't the mali recipe in meta-sunxi quite dated already? Can it work > with mainline kernel correctly? I'm trying to make meta-sunxi in state where if you pull it and add to your project it will at least build ;). I juts jumped in to help a bit so please be patient with me ;). Current state in meta-sunxi is that sunxi-mali is set as PREFFERED_PROVIDED for various opengl technologies. Also I'm not sure if it can wotj but anyway can be compiled (kernel modules + userspace stuff). Basically if you currently run on actual master core-image-sato you'll get those kind of errors. I think there must be some mis-configuration or so. > > I would suggest to try the recent blobs as described in this post: > https://bootlin.com/blog/mali-opengl-support-on-allwinner-platforms-with-mainline-linux/ Yes this would be other option to use opensource stuff from bootlin or one from oe (when it will be available) > > As I've written previously, I have been using the Wayland / Qt with > good performance on H3 using the mainline kernel. Is it something you > are looking for? > You can take a look at my dirty branch - maybe this will be any help: > https://github.com/3mdeb/meta-sunxi/tree/weston-with-kms/recipes-graphics/mali OK thanks I'll try to take a look. > > Unfortunately, I had stopped working on that and presently do not have much > time to clean up / get back to it. I can provide some support and / or get > back to it if it seems valuable and there is some interest. +1 > >> Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. > >> > >> I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. > >> > >> Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dimitris > > BR, > > > > marek > >> Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: > >>> Hi Dimitris, > >>> > >>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Hi Enrico, > >>>> > >>>> I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. > >>>> > >>>> If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. > >>>> I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. > >>> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali > >>> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. > >>>> Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Dimitris > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Marek > >>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. > >>>>> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in > >>>>> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own > >>>>> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these > >>>>> different configurations. > >>>>> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have > >>>>> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier > >>>>> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. > >>>>> > >>>>> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst > >>>>> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will > >>>>> be removed. > >>>>> > >>>>> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers > >>>>> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. > >>>>> > >>>>> Enrico > > -- > Maciej Pijanowski > Embedded Systems Engineer > https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto BR, marek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-29 8:38 ` Maciej Pijanowski 2019-05-29 11:23 ` Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-31 6:47 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-31 6:49 ` Maciej Pijanowski 1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-31 6:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Maciej Pijanowski; +Cc: yocto Hi Maciej, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 1:08 PM Maciej Pijanowski <maciej.pijanowski@3mdeb.com> wrote: > > > On 29.05.2019 09:39, Belisko Marek wrote: > > Hi Dimitris, > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Marek, > >> > >> that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. > > You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + > > libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package > > to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation > > gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but > > without any success. Also pls look at this communication: > > https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we > > can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. > What are you trying to achieve? Which kernel version are you using? > Isn't the mali recipe in meta-sunxi quite dated already? Can it work > with mainline kernel correctly? > > I would suggest to try the recent blobs as described in this post: > https://bootlin.com/blog/mali-opengl-support-on-allwinner-platforms-with-mainline-linux/ > > As I've written previously, I have been using the Wayland / Qt with > good performance on H3 using the mainline kernel. Is it something you > are looking for? > You can take a look at my dirty branch - maybe this will be any help: > https://github.com/3mdeb/meta-sunxi/tree/weston-with-kms/recipes-graphics/mali I've took some patches and now core-image-sato can be build. I have just one question for mali kernel module. Does it need some dts changes or it will work out of the box (I didn't see any dts changes in your branch thus I'm asking). Thanks. > > Unfortunately, I had stopped working on that and presently do not have much > time to clean up / get back to it. I can provide some support and / or get > back to it if it seems valuable and there is some interest. > >> Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. > >> > >> I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. > >> > >> Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dimitris > > BR, > > > > marek > >> Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: > >>> Hi Dimitris, > >>> > >>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Hi Enrico, > >>>> > >>>> I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. > >>>> > >>>> If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. > >>>> I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. > >>> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali > >>> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. > >>>> Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Dimitris > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Marek > >>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. > >>>>> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in > >>>>> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own > >>>>> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these > >>>>> different configurations. > >>>>> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have > >>>>> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier > >>>>> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. > >>>>> > >>>>> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst > >>>>> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will > >>>>> be removed. > >>>>> > >>>>> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers > >>>>> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. > >>>>> > >>>>> Enrico > > -- > Maciej Pijanowski > Embedded Systems Engineer > https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto BR, marek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-sunxi maintained? 2019-05-31 6:47 ` Belisko Marek @ 2019-05-31 6:49 ` Maciej Pijanowski 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Maciej Pijanowski @ 2019-05-31 6:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Belisko Marek; +Cc: yocto [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7469 bytes --] On 31.05.2019 08:47, Belisko Marek wrote: > Hi Maciej, > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 1:08 PM Maciej Pijanowski > <maciej.pijanowski@3mdeb.com> wrote: >> >> On 29.05.2019 09:39, Belisko Marek wrote: >>> Hi Dimitris, >>> >>> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:03 AM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Marek, >>>> >>>> that's correct. I have a branch though which I've started to experiment and add support for Mali. I didn't finished because I've tried to do this by myself from the scratch and soon I've hit a wall. Nevertheless, I've done the same for the rk3399 for nanopi-neo4 and during this process I've learned a lot on how to do it with some help from other people from the open source scene. The graphics stack was too complicated for me in the beginning. >>> You can maybe look to meta-sunxi there is sunxi-mali driver + >>> libraries which will add support for that. When I've set that package >>> to PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gles2 I get issues with compilation >>> gtk3+ and others. I've spend 2 hours looking and trying yesterday but >>> without any success. Also pls look at this communication: >>> https://github.com/linux-sunxi/meta-sunxi/issues/144 (looks like we >>> can use opensource drivers + libs later). Thanks. >> What are you trying to achieve? Which kernel version are you using? >> Isn't the mali recipe in meta-sunxi quite dated already? Can it work >> with mainline kernel correctly? >> >> I would suggest to try the recent blobs as described in this post: >> https://bootlin.com/blog/mali-opengl-support-on-allwinner-platforms-with-mainline-linux/ >> >> As I've written previously, I have been using the Wayland / Qt with >> good performance on H3 using the mainline kernel. Is it something you >> are looking for? >> You can take a look at my dirty branch - maybe this will be any help: >> https://github.com/3mdeb/meta-sunxi/tree/weston-with-kms/recipes-graphics/mali > I've took some patches and now core-image-sato can be build. I have > just one question for mali kernel module. Does it need some dts > changes or it will work out of the box (I didn't see any dts changes > in your branch thus I'm asking). > Thanks. Depending on the board. I think since then, most of the baords already have mali node in the devicetree. Especially all the H3 baords should have it. >> Unfortunately, I had stopped working on that and presently do not have much >> time to clean up / get back to it. I can provide some support and / or get >> back to it if it seems valuable and there is some interest. >>>> Therefore now that I feel much more confident with it I'm going to re-try and finish with my branch. Armbian does have support, so I'll try to stick to the Armbian backend for maintenance reasons. >>>> >>>> I hope that this will be rather easy, because the dri driver should already be there, so the only thing I believe is needed is the blobs and to create symlinks for the various so libs to that blob. >>>> >>>> Anyway, I'll try to do that also. In the meantime I will also wait a bit to see if that merge between those two layers is possible and doable, which will help to short the time and effort to do that. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Dimitris >>> BR, >>> >>> marek >>>> Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 29. Mai 2019, 08:37: >>>>> Hi Dimitris, >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Hi Enrico, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm totally positive to any possibility for such integration. Personally, that was the first thing I've tried to do before I start this layer, but I've failed as it got really complex and the overhead was too much after some point (at least for me). If you have look it's actually a mix of meta-sunxi and armbian, but I had to remove or change many stuff to fit the armbian in the layer. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have time to have a look to my layer and you think that such kind of integration is possible and can be done in a more easy way, then from my side I'm all in. >>>>>> I believe that re-using the armbian patches is easier as it makes maintenance much easier, there are more supported SBCs and also there is much more testing involved in armbian and frequent updates fix those bugs. >>>>> I did check your layer and it seems that you're not using sunxi-mali >>>>> for opengl HW acceleration only mesa so SW rendering? Thanks. >>>>>> Please consider it and I can help as much as I can and my time allows for that integration. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Dimitris >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Marek >>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56 PM Enrico <ebutera@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Dimitris Tassopoulos <dimtass@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> I was thinking about this also, too. The only reason is that in meta-sunxi they do a great job and they keep their layer clean, which is great I think. The other layers are just based on the armbian distro, which is a lot different, but for me it was much easier to integrate their patches, patching scripts and bootloader scripts to a Yocto layer. That way the only thing I do is that from time to time I just integrate their new patches and that's it. There's no development in the layer is just re-use of the armbian work and a wrapper around it. Therefore, it's hard, even no doable to put those different architectures together. But definitely that decision also bothered me a lot before I create the layer and I also don't like time to be spend on the same thing from different people. Nevertheless, from my point of view I couldn't find a way to put those things together. I've tried but I couldn't do it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Therefore, it was easier for me to do it the way I've done it. And after all, although it doesn't seem right, at the same time this is the beauty of the open source. I think the layers are just incompatible in the way that they are do things. Also it's not bad to have alternatives. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sunxi is a great community and I believe many of the armbian patches are coming from there. Others not. Of course, having them all together would be nice. But I don't think that it's possible because of the different approach. >>>>>>> It would be great to integrate all those different layers in >>>>>>> meta-sunxi,the main problem is that usually they come with their own >>>>>>> bootloader/kernel/etc.... so you have to *maintain* all these >>>>>>> different configurations. >>>>>>> Infact in the past i refused to do such things because i didn't have >>>>>>> the time to maintain all those different versions, it was just easier >>>>>>> to support what was already in mainline uboot/kernel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But of course if someone wants to do it then it's welcome, the worst >>>>>>> thing that can happen is that once an arch gets unmaintained it will >>>>>>> be removed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One thing that can be done anyway is to have those external layers >>>>>>> linked in the readme, so at least people will know they exist. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Enrico >> -- >> Maciej Pijanowski >> Embedded Systems Engineer >> https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com >> >> >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> yocto mailing list >> yocto@yoctoproject.org >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto > BR, > > marek -- Maciej Pijanowski Embedded Systems Engineer https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 817 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-05-31 7:06 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 25+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-05-27 14:49 meta-sunxi maintained? Belisko Marek 2019-05-27 15:44 ` Enrico 2019-05-27 17:32 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 8:31 ` Maciej Pijanowski 2019-05-28 9:53 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 9:01 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-28 9:49 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 9:49 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 10:05 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-28 10:11 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 10:11 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek 2019-05-28 10:56 ` Enrico 2019-05-28 11:06 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-29 6:36 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-29 6:36 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek 2019-05-29 7:03 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-29 7:39 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-29 7:39 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek 2019-05-29 8:03 ` Dimitris Tassopoulos 2019-05-29 8:17 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-29 8:17 ` [yocto] " Belisko Marek 2019-05-29 8:38 ` Maciej Pijanowski 2019-05-29 11:23 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-31 6:47 ` Belisko Marek 2019-05-31 6:49 ` Maciej Pijanowski
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.