[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm-extra][PATCH 1/3] u-boot-toradex: add U-Boot recipe for Toradex i.MX 6 based modules

[Daiane Angolini]

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Otavio Salvador
<otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> Hello Stefan,
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Stefan Agner <stefan at agner.ch> wrote:
>> On 2015-12-03 08:47, Max Krummenacher wrote:
>>> This allows building U-Boot supporting Toradex modules based on i.MX 6
>>> Apalis iMX6 and Colibri iMX6.
>>> The source is combined with the source already used for our Vybrid based
>>> modules and fetched directly from our Git server at git.toradex.com.
>>>
>>>   - based on upstream U-Boot 2015.04
>>>   - environment storage in eMMC
>>>   - Ethernet
>>>   - enabled gpio command line interface
>>>   - enabled DFU and Mass Storage on USB client
>>>   - framebuffer support
>>>   - MMC/SD cards
>>>   - eMMC flash
>>>   - RAM size auto detection
>>>   - serial console debug UART1
>>>   - Toradex Apalis configuration block handling
>>>   - USB storage as host on USB host ports
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenacher at toradex.com>
>>> ---
>>>  recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-toradex_2015.04.bb | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-toradex_2015.04.bb
>>> b/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-toradex_2015.04.bb
>>> index 175add2..17c9267 100644
>>> --- a/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-toradex_2015.04.bb
>>> +++ b/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-toradex_2015.04.bb
>>> @@ -4,4 +4,4 @@ PV = "v2015.04-v2.5b2+git${SRCPV}"
>>>
>>>  SRCREV = "1ef4a29e8cea0239411dde64f9617ad76248fd02"
>>>  SRCBRANCH = "2015.04-toradex"
>>> -COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(vf)"
>>> +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(apalis-imx6|colibri-imx6|vf)"
>>
>> We have now a bit a mix and match between SoC's and machines. Maybe
>> specify the machines explicitly as Max did is the better choice since
>> that is what we tested with that tree (although, I guess whatever works
>> upstream should also work with our tree, we usually do not break other
>> stuff on purpose :-))
>>
>> @Otavio, any preference?
>
> I prefer SoC family as it makes easier for end customers to customized
> it without need to override the compatibility set in a bbappend. As
> this provides a SoM it is common it ends being used in a custom
> carrier board and eventually a new machine file in a customer layer
> can reuse the recipe.

+1

Daiane
>
> --
> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
> http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
> Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
> --
> _______________________________________________
> meta-freescale mailing list
> meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale