[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH] Added support for i.MX6 series Nitrogen6w board Signed-off-by: Pushpalatha <pushpalatha.sg at mistralsolutions.com>
eric.nelson at boundarydevices.com
Mon Dec 17 07:49:57 PST 2012
On 12/17/2012 05:59 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Daiane Angolini <daiane.list at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Pushpalatha
>> <pushpalatha.sg at mistralsolutions.com> wrote:
>>> conf/machine/imx6qnitrogen6w.conf | 18 +
>>> .../support_nitrogen6x_config.patch | 27324 +++++++++++++++++++
>>> recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fslc_2012.10.bb | 2 +
>>> .../linux-imx-3.0.35/imx6qnitrogen6w/defconfig | 3020 ++
>>> .../support_for_nitrogen6_configuration.patch | 11469 ++++++++
>>> recipes-kernel/linux/linux-imx_3.0.35.bb | 3 +
>>> 6 files changed, 41836 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 conf/machine/imx6qnitrogen6w.conf
>> This board should be included on meta-fsl-arm-extra. Could you,
>> please, rebase your patches for that project?
> In fact I think the board we have at meta-fsl-arm ought to work just
> fine. I am unsure we need another board as I have added the wifi
> firmware there too and Eric has tested it.
Confirmed. I built using machine type nitrogen6x and ran the result
on both SABRE Lite and Nitrogen6X.
> Eric, can you comment on this?
>>> create mode 100644 recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-fslc-v2012.10/imx6qnitrogen6w/support_nitrogen6x_config.patch
>> Please, take a look https://github.com/Freescale/u-boot-imx
>> This is where we get u-boot from. It´s a fork of mainline one (denx)
>> plus some patches to include some patches that will be included on
>> next u-boot version or some patches to configure something rellated
>> with yocto (for example, scripts for inicialization).
>> I think it´s better to include your board (nitrogen6w) patches on that
>> repository instead for supporting those patches on the recipe.
>> But, the main question here is: Does u-boot mainline support
> Not yet. That's why I included u-boot-boundary recipe.
>> What´s the difference between nitrogen6x and nitrogen6w? May this
>> board use nitrogen6x support someway?
>> Otavio, could you, please, comment on this? I think it would only a
>> matter of MACHINE_FEATURE.
> Yes, I think we can have it in same machine except if there're real
> difference between them.
Except for the silk screen:
nitrogen6x == nitrogen6w
>>> create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/linux/linux-imx-3.0.35/imx6qnitrogen6w/defconfig
>>> create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/linux/linux-imx-3.0.35/imx6qnitrogen6w/support_for_nitrogen6_configuration.patch
>> The same is applicable to kernel. Apply patches in git repository and
>> then update kernel recipe.
> I did not compare the patches but I think it should be the same we
> have for sabrelite; in this case we can use overrides to avoid the
> duplication (again, done in nitrogen6x board in extra repository).
> Eric, please give us some light about the board difference?
Asked and answered.
More information about the meta-freescale