linaro-dev April 2011

linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org

101 participants
154 discussions

by yong.shen＠linaro.org

The first two patches had been post long time before, so I did not add 'v2' to them. They includes some comments from Daniel Lezcano. The last two patches are for working items defined for powerdebug.

13 years, 1 month

[PATCH android/bionic 3/3] Hide libm private symbols using GCC visibility pragma

by Jim Huang

Following the visibility changes in libc.so, this patch attempts to hide private symbols in libm.so. Reference code size measurements for HTC Passion: $ arm-eabi-size out/target/product/passion/system/lib/libm.so [before] text data bss dec hex filename 88423 256 32 88711 15a87 out/target/product/passion/system/lib/libm.so [after] text data bss dec hex filename 87950 256 32 88238 158ae out/target/product/passion/system/lib/libm.so Code Review: https://review.source.android.com/#change,17358

13 years, 1 month

[PATCH android/bionic 2/3] Hide internal symbol __bionic_brk used by brk() and sbrk()

by Jim Huang

__bionic_brk was shared by brk() and sbrk(), which should be implementor specific and hidden to application developers. Code Review: https://review.source.android.com/#change,17364

13 years, 1 month

[PATCH android/bionic 1/3] Hide private symbols using GCC visibility pragma

by Jim Huang

libc.so should not export all private symbols to reflect Android NDK. This patch attempts to use GCC visibility pragma to hide the private symbols in bionic. It also lets the optimizer produce better and smaller code. Reference code size measurements for HTC Passion: $ arm-eabi-size out/target/product/passion/system/lib/libc.so [before] text data bss dec hex filename 260000 10004 45944 315948 4d22c out/target/product/passion/system/lib/libc.so [after] text data bss dec hex filename 248655 9940 45944 304539 4a59b out/target/product/passion/system/lib/libc.so Code Review: https://review.source.android.com/#change,17361

13 years, 1 month

[PATCH android/bionic 0/3] Reduce code size of libc and libm by GCC visibility

by Jim Huang

The following set of Android bionic patches use GCC visibility pragma to hide the private symbols in bionic. It also lets the optimizer produce better and smaller machine code. [PATCH android/bionic 1/3] Hide private symbols using GCC visibility pragma [PATCH android/bionic 2/3] Hide internal symbol __bionic_brk used by brk() and sbrk() [PATCH android/bionic 3/3] Hide libm private symbols using GCC visibility pragma

13 years, 1 month

[PATCH android/frameworks/base] libagl: Enable CLZ instruction generation for TextureObjectManager

by Jim Huang

Change-Id: I54cb4755b64076007a5f631f1faa7eab2272f6e6 Code Review: https://review.source.android.com/#change,22409

13 years, 1 month

u-boot + Android 'fastboot' protocol/commands support (was: [Android: device/linaro/common] Rename the kernel to uImage for Linaro Android build)

by Jim Huang

On 19 April 2011 14:28, Amit Pundir <pundiramit(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Alexander Sack <asac(a)linaro.org> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Zach Pfeffer <pfefferz(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> That would be very nice. There's actually some documentation in u-boot >>> about fastboot (a README). I wonder if there's some support already? >> Yes, I was told that someone (TI?) had a public tree with it. If all >> goes well, John (CCed) would review those, clean the patches up, >> upstream and integrate then into our u-boot branches so we can have >> them for our LEB builds as well. > > Rowboat also has a decent Fastboot support in u-boot for OMAP3 > http://gitorious.org/rowboat/u-boot-omap3 > Not all the Fastboot commands are supported though > http://wiki.tiprocessors.com/index.php/TI-Android-GingerBread-2.3-DevKit-1.… Hi Amit, Zach, and Alexander, Thanks for your sharing about u-boot + Android 'fastboot' protocol/commands support. At least, patched u-boot works out of box on TI OMAP platforms. Can we define the basic boot loader requirements of Linaro Evaluation Build (LEB) for Android at present? I think it would be essential for validation and Android platform verification purpose. My idea is that we require abstract 'bootloader' component in Android device/linaro/common, and (patched) 'u-boot' would be the provider of 'bootloader' component in device/linaro/Linaro-Evaluation-Build-Hardware. Also, supporting firmware upgrade through 'fastboot' protocol is the recommend feature for LEB boot loader. Does it sound reasonable? Thanks, -jserv

13 years, 1 month

Testing IGEP DT support (was: Device Tree on ARM status report - Mar 20)

by Grant Likely

Hi Mounir, Took me a while, but here are the instructions for testing DT support on IGEP: The current nightly u-boot builds should work out-of-the-box with device tree support. You can use the prebuilt binaries >From what I can tell, the kernel build doesn't yet have DT enabled for any of the platforms. I need to follow up with John Rigby about this to make sure I'm looking in the right place. You'll need to build the kernel. Pull the linaro 2.6.38 kernel tree: git://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-2.6.38.git then: $ make omap2plus_defconfig $ vim .config /* turn on CONFIG_USE_OF and CONFIG_PROC_DEVICETREE */ $ make oldconfig uImage dtbs Copy the uImage and igep dtb files to the sdcard Make sure the old boot method still works Reboot and modify the boot command to load the dtb into ram about 64k below the initrd image and to use "bootm <kernel-addr> <initrd-addr> <dtb-addr>" to boot the kernel. Make sure stuff shows up in /proc/devicetree/. Also, send me your boot log. And that's it! On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 3:25 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely(a)secretlab.ca> wrote: > I had great hopes of doing these status reports once a week; but it > turns out to take more effort to get together that I estimated. > Here's the status of ARM device tree support as of today. As always, > let me know if you have any corrections or additional information. > > 1 - Latest news > --------------- > - The last vestiges of of_platform_bus_type are gone from Linus' tree > as of the 2.6.39 merge window. Everything should be using > platform_device now. > - devicetree/arm on git://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux-2.6 has > everything needed to turn on basic device tree support for any > platform. > - Support has been added for Versatile and Tegra in devicetree/arm > - Support for Samsung s5pv310 and Freescale mx5 are in devicetree/test > - Similarly, u-boot needs to have the CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT and > CONFIG_SYS_BOOTMAPSZ defined to turn on device tree support. > - I've also got patches that eliminate the need for > CONFIG_SYS_BOOTMAPSZ which I'll post shortly, but they're not quite > working yet. > - I've also got a trivial patch that should enabled CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT > on a large set of boards, but it has had pretty much zero testing. > :-) > - Jason Hui has been making awesome progress on mx5, and some of their > patches are in devicetree/test. Hopefully to move over to > devicetree/arm soon. > - Shawn Guo has also been making good progress on adding the clock > bindings to the mx5 support. There are still questions up in the air > about the best way to handle clocks though. While all the clocks > /can/ be converted to device tree data, there is also value in sharing > clock initialization data between DT and non-DT board support. The > of_platform_device_prepare() work mentioned below will help with that. > It will also be easier to work on the clock support when the common > struct clk patch series from Jeremy gets merged. Until then there > ends up being a lot of duplication of code. > - Lennert has a series of virq patches for ARM patches completed. He > is currently working on cleaning them up to get them posted. > - Patches posted for of_platform_prepare() which makes it easier for > static platform_device registrations to co-exist with device tree > data. Patches are currently in devicetree/test, and will move to > devicetree/arm shortly. > - Basic DT support has been merged into Nicolas' Linaro kernel tree. > - DT is also working on Versatile Express, OMAP, and the new Xilinx > platform, but I don't have patches for either of those platforms in my > tree. > - Rob Herring's work on the early dtb mmu maping is mainlined and > makes it much nicer to work with dtbs. > > Next steps: > -------------- > At this point I'm putting on my Linaro hat. Feel free to tune out > past this point if you're not interested how DT support will > materialize in the next release. > > There are a number of very specific tasks that need to be completed > for the 11.05 release. The goal is to have basic device tree support > turned on and working on all of the platforms supported in the > release. There isn't a lot of time to get this pulled together, but > all the infrastructure is in places, so most of the work is turning on > the configuration options and testing the platforms. > > For each board, I need an engineer to do the following: > > 1) Enable CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT and CONFIG_SYS_BOOTMAPSZ against the Linaro > u-boot tree. > 2) Enable CONFIG_OF and CONFIG_PROC_DEVICETREE in the kernel > 3) Add something like the following to the *existing* machine > definition. For initial basic support, you don't need to create a > separate <soc>-dt.c board support file yet. > > +static const char *omap4_panda_dt_match[] __initdata = { > + "ti,omap4-panda", > + NULL > +}; > + > MACHINE_START(OMAP4_PANDA, "OMAP4 Panda board") > [...] > + .dt_compat = omap4_panda_dt_match, > MACHINE_END > > The string in the match table should be in the form "<vendor>,<board-name>" > > 4) Add a template .dts file for the board in > arch/arm/boot/dts/<board>.dts. The following should be sufficient: > > /dts-v1/; > > / { > model = "TI OMAP4 PandaBoard"; > compatible = "ti,omap4-panda"; > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <1>; > > aliases { > }; > > memory { > device_type = "memory"; > reg = <0x80000000 0x08000000>; > }; > > chosen { > }; > }; > 5) test it :-) > 6) send patches to me for inclusion in the Linaro U-Boot and Kernel > trees. I'll collect them to start and ask John and Nicolas to pull > them into their trees when they're ready. > > This is enough for very basic device tree support and I expect it will > only take a day or so of effort to get completed. It won't be > particularly useful, but it ensures that the infrastructure is enabled > and working. > > Bonus points if you're also able to provide patches that add > of_platform_device_probe() and of_platform_bus_populate() calls to the > board support so that device nodes get attached to the devices and can > be used for attaching things like gpios, spi devices, and i2c devices. > This is a nice to have for 11.05, but it isn't a requirement to have > it working on all boards. > > Here is the list of hwpacks that should be supported to the best of my > knowledge. Please reply with the hwpacks you can take responsibility > for: > > efikamx > igep > imx51 > omap3-x11-base > omap3 > overo > panda > s5pv310 > vexpress > > There are also some specific cross-platform tasks that need some love. > Let me know if you can take responsibility for any of these items. > - Eliminate CONFIG_SYS_BOOTMAPSZ dependency from U-Boot. I've got a > patch series that does this, but it is untested. I'll post the series > tomorrow. > - Add packaging of .dtb files into linux-image-linaro-* packages. > Loic and I discussed putting them under /lib/dtb/`uname -r`/, but > thinking about it more, it might make more sense to share the modules > directory and use /lib/modules/`uname -r`/dtbs. The dtc tool needed > to build the .dtbs is included with the kernel tree. > - Add relevant dtb files to boot partition in linaro-image tools > - Add boot script which passes dtb as 3rd argument to 'bootm' > > For purposes of tracking, I'll register bugs for the above items in > the Linaro bug tracker tomorrow. > > Cheers, > g. > > -- > Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. > Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. > -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.

13 years, 1 month

[Android: device/linaro/common] Rename the kernel to uImage for Linaro Android build

by patrik.ryd＠linaro.org

From: Patrik Ryd <patrik.ryd(a)linaro.org> In the Linaro set up u-boot will look for uImage (and not for kernel). --- tasks/kernel.mk | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tasks/kernel.mk b/tasks/kernel.mk index a016d6e..f0ebb93 100644 --- a/tasks/kernel.mk +++ b/tasks/kernel.mk @@ -3,5 +3,5 @@ android_kernel: make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=../$(TARGET_TOOLS_PREFIX) defconfig $(KERNEL_CONFIG) &&\ make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=../$(TARGET_TOOLS_PREFIX) uImage -$(PRODUCT_OUT)/kernel: android_kernel - ln -sf ../../../../kernel/arch/arm/boot/uImage $(PRODUCT_OUT)/kernel \ No newline at end of file +$(PRODUCT_OUT)/uImage: android_kernel + ln -sf ../../../../kernel/arch/arm/boot/uImage $(PRODUCT_OUT)/uImage \ No newline at end of file -- 1.7.1

13 years, 1 month

[PATCH v2 Android: build.git 1/2] Rename the kernel to uImage for Linaro Android build

by Patrik Ryd

In the Linaro set up u-boot will look for uImage (and not for kernel). This patch is Linaro specific and should not be contibuted to AOSP. --- target/board/Android.mk | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/target/board/Android.mk b/target/board/Android.mk index 82dee3c..f3e4729 100644 --- a/target/board/Android.mk +++ b/target/board/Android.mk @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ else endif # TARGET_NO_BOOTLOADER ifneq ($(strip $(TARGET_NO_KERNEL)),true) - INSTALLED_KERNEL_TARGET := $(PRODUCT_OUT)/kernel + INSTALLED_KERNEL_TARGET := $(PRODUCT_OUT)/uImage else INSTALLED_KERNEL_TARGET := endif -- 1.7.1

13 years, 1 month

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
16
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-dev April 2011