[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 07:42:43 PST 2012
On 12/17/2012 05:53 AM, Daiane Angolini 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?
>> 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).
Who's the maintainer of this tree? It seems that Otavio's been making
updates to it for OE/Yocto:
From a brief look, it seems that this is based on the official
main-line code, which is certainly usable but will lack some
Dirk has been very diligent about tracking the set of patches submitted
but not yet accepted by main-line U-Boot on i.MX6 in his tree:
These include things like OTP support which are still in flux
and some support for Nitrogen6X.
We based our 'production' branch on Dirk's efforts:
This is what we're shipping with new orders of SABRE Lite or
Nitrogen6X. Both of those boards use 'nitrogen6x_defconfig' and
we auto-detect the board for the small changes in flow.
> I think it´s better to include your board (nitrogen6w) patches on that
> repository instead for supporting those patches on the recipe.
We've submitted patches, but they need some re-work before
a second attempt.
In particular, we've been waiting for Troy's patches adding support
for C Preprocessor usage in the board.cfg files. These will help
unify the common bits of Solo/DualLite and 6Quad/6Dual.
> But, the main question here is: Does u-boot mainline support
A U-Boot based on mx6qsabrelite_config will boot, but ethernet won't
work, since the PHY reset pin changed between the two boards.
The other differences (notably audio) aren't really applicable
A more complete description and comparison is available here:
> What´s the difference between nitrogen6x and nitrogen6w? May this
> board use nitrogen6x support someway?
There isn't any difference besides the name. We originally intended
to build a "Nitrogen6X" that was a complete clone of SABRE Lite, but
have decided against it, and have deprecated the name 'Nitrogen6W'.
> Otavio, could you, please, comment on this? I think it would only a
> matter of MACHINE_FEATURE.
>> 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.
Same comments apply, though obviously audio routing and Wi-Fi/BT
support are critical in the kernel.
Our latest non-Android kernel is available in this branch of
our GitHub repository:
It's based on the Freescale release of the same name, minus the
"boundary". We've included a branch for that to make comparison
More information about the meta-freescale