[meta-freescale] Booting 3.5.7 kernel on imx6sabresd?
randy.krakora at freescale.com
randy.krakora at freescale.com
Wed Jan 22 07:06:20 PST 2014
Ok, so I found the prebuilt images for my board here:
I burned a card with one - core-image-minimal-imx6qsabresd.sdcard. It seemed to work to boot the kernel, so I copied my kernel and .dtb file to that card and it booted as shown below.
** Unable to read file boot.scr **
4667456 bytes read in 215 ms (20.7 MiB/s)
Booting from mmc ...
46128 bytes read in 20 ms (2.2 MiB/s)
## Booting kernel from Legacy Image at 12000000 ...
Image Name: Linux-3.5.7-1.0.0+3285970
Image Type: ARM Linux Kernel Image (uncompressed)
Data Size: 4667392 Bytes = 4.5 MiB
Load Address: 10008000
Entry Point: 10008000
Verifying Checksum ... OK
## Flattened Device Tree blob at 11000000
Booting using the fdt blob at 0x11000000
Loading Kernel Image ... OK
Using Device Tree in place at 11000000, end 1100e42f
Starting kernel ...
<Hung here for many minutes>
So, it appears maybe there is something wrong with my kernel build? Any ideas would be appreciated.
From: Angolini Daiane-B19406
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:04 PM
To: Otavio Salvador; Krakora Randy-B37740
Cc: meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org
Subject: RE: [meta-freescale] Booting 3.5.7 kernel on imx6sabresd?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: meta-freescale-bounces at yoctoproject.org [mailto:meta-freescale-
> bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Otavio Salvador
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:24 PM
> To: Krakora Randy-B37740
> Cc: meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Booting 3.5.7 kernel on imx6sabresd?
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Ra37740 at freescale.comndy
> <b37740 at freescale.com> wrote:
> > On 01/21/2014 11:21 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:16 PM, randy.krakora at freescale.com
> >> <randy.krakora at freescale.com> wrote:
> >>> fdt_addr was already 0x18000000.
> >>> Is there anything else maybe?
> >> You could try to update the U-Boot to what we're using in Dora.
> >> I barely remember of dealing with this but I don't recall what was
> >> the fix ...
> >> Sorry,
> > Which u-boot does dora update as latest? meta-fsl-arm or
> > meta-fsl-bsp-release?
> You call; I will always advice you to use the mainline one. Dora uses
Meta-fsl-arm uses, by default, the u-boot from denx, it means, the mainline u-boot (we call it u-boot-fslc) Meta-fsl-bsp-release  uses, by default, the u-boot fork created by Freescale (we can it u-boot-imx)
Latest dora u-boot from meta-fsl-arm is 2013.10 Latest dora u-boot from meta-fsl-bsp-release is 2013.04
Meta-fsl-bsp-release is an additional layer used by Freescale *on top of* meta-fsl-arm in order to add new version of packages on every new BSP release. It adds, for example, the new kernel version, and some configuration, for example the configuration that change the default u-boot used by imx6 boards.
Remember that, usually, a Freescale release only support a set of boards (for example imx6), but meta-fsl-arm does support all boards.
We, as community, prefer to have u-boot mainline because we think it´s the best choice at long term, both for development and for support. We do value u-boot-imx, and as much as possible, we work to integrate the important features from u-boot-imx to u-boot-fslc (and, you can imagine, we work on this when we have some time). Today, we believe u-boot-fslc can handle all the boards, only few exception uses a u-boot fork, but the direction we have is migrating as much as possible to u-boot mainline.
The kernel can be used as a parallel comparison. Today, we cannot use linux-fslc for most of supported board, the main reason is GPU support. As GPU has closed source code, the mainline integration is already a dilemma. But, as u-boot, the general guideline is having as much as possible on mainline, for both easy development and easy support. In long term is much better to have mainline kernel as default.
I´m being obvious and leaving the main point of this discussion, but I only want to clear this point for people who don´t think it´s so obvious. If there is someone having a bad time to understand all this layering and don´t want to ask in ML, please, send me an email and I will do my best to explain what I know (it´s confusing to me as well)
 I´m sure I´m not the person to detail this issue, so I apologize if it´s not a dilemma, in definition.
More information about the meta-freescale