[meta-freescale] [PATCH] mx6q-ba16: Add initial board support
daiane.list at gmail.com
Thu Aug 27 09:14:45 PDT 2015
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Justin Waters
<justin.waters at timesys.com> wrote:
Adding my comments on top of what Otavio already answered.
> We have been working with a vanilla (4.0+) kernel on some related platforms,
> and are considering moving the BA16 platform to this as well. Is there an
> effort to move some of the mainline work, such as etna-viv and related
> packages, into the meta-freescale layer?
I cannot say I have never heart about being asked if etna-viv would be
supported by meta-fsl-arm, but I have not seen any concrete action
> Would it be acceptable to push a
> 4.0 kernel even if those packages are not supported?
I think it would be acceptable for sure.
But obviously it would be better to work to get vivante support anyway
even if using 4.0+ kernel.
> Thank you,
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Daiane Angolini <daiane.list at gmail.com>
>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Justin Waters
>> <justin.waters at timesys.com> wrote:
>> > Daiane,
>> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Daiane Angolini
>> > <daiane.list at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> > +SRCBRANCH = "3.10.17-advantech"
>> >> > +SRCREV = "852aa790665cd8f4350e5efbbb1d3471c78194fd"
>> >> > +DEPENDS += "lzop-native bc-native"
>> >> > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(mx6q-ba16)"
>> >> Is there a plan to have more imx6 Advantech's boards in future?
>> > Possibly, although most are based on this DMS-BA16 module, and only
>> > really
>> > differ with the device tree. More than likely, it will just be appended
>> > lines to the device tree list.
>> In this case, I think it's OK to get a machine name in
>> COMPATIBLE_MACHINE. Otherwise I would point wandboard as an example on
>> how to have several boards with only one kernel.
> Justin Waters
> Director of Engineering
> Timesys Corporation
More information about the meta-freescale