meta-sunxi maintained?

meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Enrico]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Maciej Pijanowski]

[-- 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 --]

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Dimitris Tassopoulos]

[-- 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 --]

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Dimitris Tassopoulos]

[-- 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 --]

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Enrico]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Dimitris Tassopoulos]

[-- 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 --]

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Dimitris Tassopoulos]

[-- 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 --]

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Dimitris Tassopoulos]

[-- 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 --]

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: [yocto] meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Maciej Pijanowski]

[-- 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 --]

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Belisko Marek]

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

Re: meta-sunxi maintained?

[Maciej Pijanowski]

[-- 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 --]