Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

[John Weber]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1683 bytes --]

Hi,

I've just recently started using Yocto for i.MX6 development, and I'm
working on adding Wandboard support to it, based on the Wandboard SDK that
they released on 8 Feb.

I think I have U-boot running with a bit more functionality than is in the
SDK.  The SDK u-boot is, they admit, very bare bones.  Mainly, I've added
ethernet support to it.  I've successfully downloaded and booted a kernel
with it, but I haven't done much else yet.

The u-boot in the Wandboard SDK is based on Freescale's SDK u-boot
(u-boot-imx_2009.08), so it is not the mainline u-boot that the members of
this list seem to be working with.  I would like to forward port this, but
my first goal is to get it running with the codebases that are closest to
the FSL SDK and then do any forward porting.  By then, I hope that others
in the community will be working on this too.  I'm not signing up to do
this port, but I'll happily share any changes that I think are relevant to
this group.

It may or may not work on Wandboard-Solo.  I don't have a Solo board to
test with.

My question is this - in a project like this, when I'm not in the mode of
fixing bugs but adding a lot of features - when is the right time to send a
patch to this list?   I'm attaching it here, but alternatively, I can
submit this patch to the list as well, knowing that it should be considered
development and should be tested.

Also, I'm new to this, so if someone could take a look over this patch and
provide any advice, that would be great.  My guess is that I need to figure
out how to chop it up into much smaller patches and submit a series, if I
were doing this for real.

Thanks,
John

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1889 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Initial-u-boot-support-for-Wandboard-Dual.patch.zip --]
[-- Type: application/zip, Size: 14580 bytes --]

Re: Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

[Eric Bénard]

Hi John,

Le Mon, 18 Feb 2013 21:30:40 -0600,
John Weber <rjohnweber@gmail.com> a écrit :
> My question is this - in a project like this, when I'm not in the mode of
> fixing bugs but adding a lot of features - when is the right time to send a
> patch to this list?   I'm attaching it here, but alternatively, I can
> submit this patch to the list as well, knowing that it should be considered
> development and should be tested.
> 
You send it when it works for you and when you believe it's ready for
mailine so you get comments and if fixes are needed you can then
polish the patch and send a v2.
I've received my Wandboards (one Dual and one Solo) yesterday so I
expect to be able to test your patch very soon.

> Also, I'm new to this, so if someone could take a look over this patch and
> provide any advice, that would be great.  My guess is that I need to figure
> out how to chop it up into much smaller patches and submit a series, if I
> were doing this for real.
> 
I've not yet looked in detail the patch, but here are 2 details :
- as Wandboard is not a board designed by Freescale, you should create
  the patch against https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm-extra and
  not against meta-fsl-arm,
- it's better for review to send the patch using git send-email as
  stated in the README. 

Thanks !
Eric

Re: Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

[Otavio Salvador]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:30 AM, John Weber <rjohnweber@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just recently started using Yocto for i.MX6 development, and I'm
> working on adding Wandboard support to it, based on the Wandboard SDK that
> they released on 8 Feb.

Great.

> I think I have U-boot running with a bit more functionality than is in the
> SDK.  The SDK u-boot is, they admit, very bare bones.  Mainly, I've added
> ethernet support to it.  I've successfully downloaded and booted a kernel
> with it, but I haven't done much else yet.

Nice.

> The u-boot in the Wandboard SDK is based on Freescale's SDK u-boot
> (u-boot-imx_2009.08), so it is not the mainline u-boot that the members of
> this list seem to be working with.  I would like to forward port this, but
> my first goal is to get it running with the codebases that are closest to
> the FSL SDK and then do any forward porting.  By then, I hope that others in
> the community will be working on this too.  I'm not signing up to do this
> port, but I'll happily share any changes that I think are relevant to this
> group.

I think we could do it in different order. Include their BSP support
(as is) in meta-fsl-arm-extra and work in U-Boot mainline to add
support for it and than move it to U-Boot mainline. This way it can be
added faster.

> It may or may not work on Wandboard-Solo.  I don't have a Solo board to test
> with.
>
> My question is this - in a project like this, when I'm not in the mode of
> fixing bugs but adding a lot of features - when is the right time to send a
> patch to this list?   I'm attaching it here, but alternatively, I can submit
> this patch to the list as well, knowing that it should be considered
> development and should be tested.

I don't own these boards so I cannot help on it.

> Also, I'm new to this, so if someone could take a look over this patch and
> provide any advice, that would be great.  My guess is that I need to figure
> out how to chop it up into much smaller patches and submit a series, if I
> were doing this for real.

Yes, we need a series of patch but we need to be clear here.

Here you should sent a series of patch to add support in Yocto; in
U-Boot mainline mailing list you should send a series of patch to add
support in U-Boot mainline.

Please read the README about how to send patches.

Regards,

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

[John Weber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3729 bytes --]

Eric and Otavio -

Thanks for your advice.  I have already worked on putting this into
meta-fsl-arm-extra.  Just to make sure that I am clear - would a series of
patches to add u-boot-imx support for Wandboard be accepted or are you only
focusing on U-boot mainline at this point?

Is there any advice you can give on how to break these up?

Otavio - The wandboard folks do not have an external git repo we could use
to create a nice recipe.  You have to download and unpack the xz tarball,
which contains all of the sources and precompiled binaries.  And, I think
they started with an earlier version of u-boot and the kernel.  I suppose
we could put them all on github and then point recipes to that.  The
initial u-boot support that I'm attempting to provide has ethernet
functionality which their SDK lacks on top of the latest u-boot-imx.

Thanks for your patience.

Regards,
John


On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:30 AM, John Weber <rjohnweber@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've just recently started using Yocto for i.MX6 development, and I'm
> > working on adding Wandboard support to it, based on the Wandboard SDK
> that
> > they released on 8 Feb.
>
> Great.
>
> > I think I have U-boot running with a bit more functionality than is in
> the
> > SDK.  The SDK u-boot is, they admit, very bare bones.  Mainly, I've added
> > ethernet support to it.  I've successfully downloaded and booted a kernel
> > with it, but I haven't done much else yet.
>
> Nice.
>
> > The u-boot in the Wandboard SDK is based on Freescale's SDK u-boot
> > (u-boot-imx_2009.08), so it is not the mainline u-boot that the members
> of
> > this list seem to be working with.  I would like to forward port this,
> but
> > my first goal is to get it running with the codebases that are closest to
> > the FSL SDK and then do any forward porting.  By then, I hope that
> others in
> > the community will be working on this too.  I'm not signing up to do this
> > port, but I'll happily share any changes that I think are relevant to
> this
> > group.
>
> I think we could do it in different order. Include their BSP support
> (as is) in meta-fsl-arm-extra and work in U-Boot mainline to add
> support for it and than move it to U-Boot mainline. This way it can be
> added faster.
>
> > It may or may not work on Wandboard-Solo.  I don't have a Solo board to
> test
> > with.
> >
> > My question is this - in a project like this, when I'm not in the mode of
> > fixing bugs but adding a lot of features - when is the right time to
> send a
> > patch to this list?   I'm attaching it here, but alternatively, I can
> submit
> > this patch to the list as well, knowing that it should be considered
> > development and should be tested.
>
> I don't own these boards so I cannot help on it.
>
> > Also, I'm new to this, so if someone could take a look over this patch
> and
> > provide any advice, that would be great.  My guess is that I need to
> figure
> > out how to chop it up into much smaller patches and submit a series, if I
> > were doing this for real.
>
> Yes, we need a series of patch but we need to be clear here.
>
> Here you should sent a series of patch to add support in Yocto; in
> U-Boot mainline mailing list you should send a series of patch to add
> support in U-Boot mainline.
>
> Please read the README about how to send patches.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
> E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
> Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4790 bytes --]

Re: Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

[Otavio Salvador]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:06 PM, John Weber <rjohnweber@gmail.com> wrote:
> Eric and Otavio -
>
> Thanks for your advice.  I have already worked on putting this into
> meta-fsl-arm-extra.  Just to make sure that I am clear - would a series of
> patches to add u-boot-imx support for Wandboard be accepted or are you only
> focusing on U-boot mainline at this point?

It'd be accepted, sure. However please target meta-fsl-arm-extra as
this is not an official Freescale board.

> Is there any advice you can give on how to break these up?

Well usually I do:

u-boot
kernel
machine config

But you can send those as a serie and we review it. We can than ask
for further changes if need.

> Otavio - The wandboard folks do not have an external git repo we could use
> to create a nice recipe.  You have to download and unpack the xz tarball,
> which contains all of the sources and precompiled binaries.  And, I think
> they started with an earlier version of u-boot and the kernel.  I suppose we
> could put them all on github and then point recipes to that.  The initial
> u-boot support that I'm attempting to provide has ethernet functionality
> which their SDK lacks on top of the latest u-boot-imx.

I'd prefer if you generate a diff from official u-boot-imx and we
apply it on top of u-boot-imx source. I'd also prefer if you split
official Wandboard patch from your improvements on top of it so it is
clear what come from them and what you have done so far.

> Thanks for your patience.

You're welcome; thanks by working on that.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

[John Weber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2532 bytes --]

Hi Otavio,

I suspect the Wandboard SDK U-boot is many commits behind the one that is
fetched in the current u-boot-imx_2009.08.bb recipe.  I've asked about the
commit that they used to start with from the freescale git repo, but I
haven't received a response yet.  The diff is pretty large and contains
lots of changes that are not specific to Wandboard.

I based the patch on the diff, only I extracted the necessary changes and
left all of the changes that could be attributed to upstream commits.

I will break up the patch into a series as you suggested.

John


On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:06 PM, John Weber <rjohnweber@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Eric and Otavio -
> >
> > Thanks for your advice.  I have already worked on putting this into
> > meta-fsl-arm-extra.  Just to make sure that I am clear - would a series
> of
> > patches to add u-boot-imx support for Wandboard be accepted or are you
> only
> > focusing on U-boot mainline at this point?
>
> It'd be accepted, sure. However please target meta-fsl-arm-extra as
> this is not an official Freescale board.
>
> > Is there any advice you can give on how to break these up?
>
> Well usually I do:
>
> u-boot
> kernel
> machine config
>
> But you can send those as a serie and we review it. We can than ask
> for further changes if need.
>
> > Otavio - The wandboard folks do not have an external git repo we could
> use
> > to create a nice recipe.  You have to download and unpack the xz tarball,
> > which contains all of the sources and precompiled binaries.  And, I think
> > they started with an earlier version of u-boot and the kernel.  I
> suppose we
> > could put them all on github and then point recipes to that.  The initial
> > u-boot support that I'm attempting to provide has ethernet functionality
> > which their SDK lacks on top of the latest u-boot-imx.
>
> I'd prefer if you generate a diff from official u-boot-imx and we
> apply it on top of u-boot-imx source. I'd also prefer if you split
> official Wandboard patch from your improvements on top of it so it is
> clear what come from them and what you have done so far.
>
> > Thanks for your patience.
>
> You're welcome; thanks by working on that.
>
> --
> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
> E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
> Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3497 bytes --]

Re: Initial u-boot support for Wandboard Dual

[Otavio Salvador]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:29 PM, John Weber <rjohnweber@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Otavio,
>
> I suspect the Wandboard SDK U-boot is many commits behind the one that is
> fetched in the current u-boot-imx_2009.08.bb recipe.  I've asked about the
> commit that they used to start with from the freescale git repo, but I
> haven't received a response yet.  The diff is pretty large and contains lots
> of changes that are not specific to Wandboard.

Yes; sometimes people do not provide good information about their base
of work...

> I based the patch on the diff, only I extracted the necessary changes and
> left all of the changes that could be attributed to upstream commits.

I think their changes should be mostly in boards/wandboard/something
and include/configs/

> I will break up the patch into a series as you suggested.

Good; thx!

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br