Hi,
Need your help to fix the IMX6 board.
Problem :
Initially I was able to boot IMX6 till kernel then I was getting probe
error ( return code -16 ), I was just browsing through net for help I got
additional support from linaro site to reset probe to 1 and flash new
address I followed same procedure but after doing that board is not booting
up. Chip is not bootiing up from SD3/SD4/SPI NOR flash.
Kindly help me to boot the board for further, will be appreciate.
Thanks in advance,
Dushyantha
Hi all,
It seems that the Android boot animation really consumes a lot of CPU.
At least when running on the ARM fast models, I see a typical steady-
state load (bootanimation+surfaceflinger) of about 65% CPU.
I can kill the boot animation interactively, but does anyone know how to
disable it properly? This would likely be a benefit to the test and
validation work on the models.
After killing the boot animation, I can boot a fresh release to the
desktop in under 8 minutes on the model, with full cache modelling
disabled. A preinitialised image will boot to the unlock screen in
around 2.5 minutes.
Cheers
---Dave
Hi
I am trying linaro on pandaboard . But usb mass storage is not detected on
file system. i am using file manager HD to browse file system on android.
i would appreciate if you can tell me linaro version which supports usb
mass storage.
Thanks
--
Hello,
Yong Qin is working on the blueprint
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/lava-android-test/+spec/modify-android-bui…
to add arbitrary custom client-side scripts to Android Build. He
submitted first implementation of it as
https://code.launchpad.net/~liuyq0307/linaro-android-build-tools/run-custom…
and documented as
https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/AndroidBuild-LavaIntegration .
Unfortunately, I'm not thrilled with that implementation, more
specifically, its "user interface" (i.e. any parts which user directly
faces) by the following reasons:
1. The idea behind Android Build's build config was that they're short
and easy for human to parse, essentially one glance-over would enough
to get a good idea what is built here, even for outsider. Consequently,
the configs should not be overloaded with details not related to
building. If there's a need for integration with other systems, we have
good pattern of externalizing such details and then just referring to
them with a single variable in a build config.
2. The whole approach in
https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/AndroidBuild-LavaIntegration
seems like trying to encode hierarchical structure in the shell syntax,
which is not much supporting of that. The end result looks pretty much
like representation of graph structure in raw assembler - it's
spaghetti mix of data pieces and labels, requiring long time to wrap
hand around to understand it, and cumbersome and error-prone to write.
So, I would like to propose alternative syntax solving the issues
above. I probably should start with saying that if the talk is about
LAVA, then using native LAVA JSON request immediately comes to mind.
Well, I guess human-writability wasn't a design goal for that, so I
skip it. It still makes sense to stick to general-purpose hierarchical
structure syntax though. Except that JSON has 2 problems: a) it doesn't
support comments natively, so we'll need to pre-process it; b) error
reporting/localization may be still no ideal.
Anyway, here's my try, it is presented as a comment to
https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/AndroidBuild-LavaIntegration
and then full example at
https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/AndroidBuild-LavaIntegration/pfalc…
Let's discuss if that covers our needs and constraints.
Thanks,
Paul
Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linarohttp://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog
... and created a 4.0.4 build.
linaro_android_4.0.4 branches are created where necessary.
The most interesting piece of news is probably that we no longer need
linaro_* branches of platform/system/extras and
platform/external/ipsec-tools - the patches we've had there are
obsolete.
This may be a good time to submit more patches to AOSP given the
divergence should be rather low right now.
ttyl
bero
I want to rename vexpress-a9 to just plain vexpress, because it also
supports A15 and A5 cores and the current name confuses everyone. Are
these the steps I would need to follow...?
1. To avoid breaking people trying to build previous releases I would
need to get a new git repo created called device/linaro/vexpress.git
which is a copy of the existing vexpress-a9.git and then edit the
contents of this to remove references to 'a9'.
2. Copy the manifest file staging-vexpress-a9.xml to
staging-vexpress.xml (or should it be landing-vexpress.xml)?
Then edit the device path to the new device git.
3. Update build jobs on android-build.l.o
4. Tell someone about this so the instructions on the download pages get
updated for next month's release.
5. Anything else? (I've already updated l-a-m-c to accept the new name)
--
Tixy
Hi All,
I see that the linaro branch tilt-linaro-android-3.1 is not available
in this tree (git://git.linaro.org/landing-teams/working/ti/kernel.git
). The branch name is the one mentioned under linaro-android- + Panda
enablement. Is there an alternate branch that can be used? or should I
just use the tilt-linaro-android-3.0?
--
Thank you and Regards
Subbu