linaro-dev

linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org

4332 discussions

Start a nNew thread

[PATCH 0/2] cpuidle driver on iMX platform

by yong.shen＠linaro.org

Also to freescale list, since there is no such driver in freescale bsp so far. Yong

13 years, 10 months

[PATCH] ARM: S5P: Fix end address in memory resource information for UART devices

by Thomas Abraham

For S5P platforms, the end address in memory resource information for UART devices is one byte more than the intended value. Fix this by reducing the end address by one byte. Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham(a)linaro.org> --- arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-uart.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-uart.c b/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-uart.c index 6a73428..afaf87f 100644 --- a/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-uart.c +++ b/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-uart.c @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ static struct resource s5p_uart0_resource[] = { [0] = { .start = S5P_PA_UART0, - .end = S5P_PA_UART0 + S5P_SZ_UART, + .end = S5P_PA_UART0 + S5P_SZ_UART - 1, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, }, [1] = { @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static struct resource s5p_uart0_resource[] = { static struct resource s5p_uart1_resource[] = { [0] = { .start = S5P_PA_UART1, - .end = S5P_PA_UART1 + S5P_SZ_UART, + .end = S5P_PA_UART1 + S5P_SZ_UART - 1, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, }, [1] = { @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static struct resource s5p_uart1_resource[] = { static struct resource s5p_uart2_resource[] = { [0] = { .start = S5P_PA_UART2, - .end = S5P_PA_UART2 + S5P_SZ_UART, + .end = S5P_PA_UART2 + S5P_SZ_UART - 1, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, }, [1] = { @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ static struct resource s5p_uart3_resource[] = { #if CONFIG_SERIAL_SAMSUNG_UARTS > 3 [0] = { .start = S5P_PA_UART3, - .end = S5P_PA_UART3 + S5P_SZ_UART, + .end = S5P_PA_UART3 + S5P_SZ_UART - 1, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, }, [1] = { @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ static struct resource s5p_uart4_resource[] = { #if CONFIG_SERIAL_SAMSUNG_UARTS > 4 [0] = { .start = S5P_PA_UART4, - .end = S5P_PA_UART4 + S5P_SZ_UART, + .end = S5P_PA_UART4 + S5P_SZ_UART - 1, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, }, [1] = { @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ static struct resource s5p_uart5_resource[] = { #if CONFIG_SERIAL_SAMSUNG_UARTS > 5 [0] = { .start = S5P_PA_UART5, - .end = S5P_PA_UART5 + S5P_SZ_UART, + .end = S5P_PA_UART5 + S5P_SZ_UART - 1, .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, }, [1] = { -- 1.6.6.rc2

13 years, 10 months

Compiling linaro filesystems

by Amit Mahajan

Hi, I want to compile linaro filesystems from sources with debug info. I tried using XDeb but it seems like it is just a cross compiling environment and not a complete root filesystem builder. Can anyone point me to a tutorial for this, or atleast share some info on what configurations i.e packages are used in various filesystems like headleass/netbook. Also, I see that some folks are able to run linaro filesystems on PandaBoard. When will be the official stable release for PandaBoard will be done? -- Thanks Amit Mahajan

13 years, 10 months

Linaro-Natty images on the PandaBoard

by Ken Werner

Hi there, When booting linaro snapshots on my PandaBoard the system hangs a few seconds after the bash prompt is shown (sometimes a little earlier). My first step was to enable magic-sysrq but the system doesn't react on them. It looks like it's already powered off - very strange. I've tried various hwpacks and headless images and also an SD-card image that works works on a pandaboard of a colleague (20110127 hwpack with 20110126 headless) but everything fails with the same symptoms. I used two different power supplies and several SD cards - also no difference. The board itself doesn't seem to be defective as the ubuntu-netbook-10.10-preinstalled-netbook-armel+omap4.img runs flawlessly for hours. I replaced the 2.6.35 omap4 kernel of the ubuntu 10.10 image with a kernel built from the latest git://git.linaro.org/ubuntu/linux-linaro- natty.git - but then the board hangs again. Attached is the output of the serial console. Any hints/suggestions on how to get the linaro kernel working on this board are much appreciated. Regards Ken

13 years, 10 months

[PATCH] ARM: S5P: Fix length of memory resource definition for UART devices

by thomas.abraham＠linaro.org

From: Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham(a)linaro.org> The length of memory resource definition for UART devices in all the s5p platforms is one byte more than the intended value. This patch fixes the UART memory resource definition for all s5p platforms. Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham(a)linaro.org> --- arch/arm/mach-s5p6442/include/mach/map.h | 2 +- arch/arm/mach-s5p64x0/include/mach/map.h | 2 +- arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/include/mach/map.h | 2 +- arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/include/mach/map.h | 2 +- arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/map.h | 2 +- 5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5p6442/include/mach/map.h b/arch/arm/mach-s5p6442/include/mach/map.h index 203dd5a..59464f9 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-s5p6442/include/mach/map.h +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5p6442/include/mach/map.h @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ #define S5P_PA_UART0 (S5P6442_PA_UART + 0x0) #define S5P_PA_UART1 (S5P6442_PA_UART + 0x400) #define S5P_PA_UART2 (S5P6442_PA_UART + 0x800) -#define S5P_SZ_UART SZ_256 +#define S5P_SZ_UART (SZ_256 - 1) #define S5P6442_PA_IIC0 (0xEC100000) diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5p64x0/include/mach/map.h b/arch/arm/mach-s5p64x0/include/mach/map.h index a9365e5..c32c117 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-s5p64x0/include/mach/map.h +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5p64x0/include/mach/map.h @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ #define S5P_PA_UART4 S5P6450_PA_UART(4) #define S5P_PA_UART5 S5P6450_PA_UART(5) -#define S5P_SZ_UART SZ_256 +#define S5P_SZ_UART (SZ_256 - 1) #define S5P6440_PA_IIC0 (0xEC104000) #define S5P6440_PA_IIC1 (0xEC20F000) diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/include/mach/map.h b/arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/include/mach/map.h index ccbe6b7..f999021 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/include/mach/map.h +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/include/mach/map.h @@ -128,6 +128,6 @@ #define S5P_PA_UART2 S5P_PA_UART(2) #define S5P_PA_UART3 S5P_PA_UART(3) -#define S5P_SZ_UART SZ_256 +#define S5P_SZ_UART (SZ_256 - 1) #endif /* __ASM_ARCH_MAP_H */ diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/include/mach/map.h b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/include/mach/map.h index 1dd5883..89b4f0b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/include/mach/map.h +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/include/mach/map.h @@ -130,6 +130,6 @@ #define S5P_PA_UART2 S5P_PA_UART(2) #define S5P_PA_UART3 S5P_PA_UART(3) -#define S5P_SZ_UART SZ_256 +#define S5P_SZ_UART (SZ_256 - 1) #endif /* __ASM_ARCH_MAP_H */ diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/map.h b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/map.h index 901657f..5235024 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/map.h +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/map.h @@ -139,6 +139,6 @@ #define S5P_PA_UART3 S5P_PA_UART(3) #define S5P_PA_UART4 S5P_PA_UART(4) -#define S5P_SZ_UART SZ_256 +#define S5P_SZ_UART (SZ_256 - 1) #endif /* __ASM_ARCH_MAP_H */ -- 1.6.6.rc2

13 years, 10 months

Minutes from the Infrastructure team meeting - 2011-02-08

by James Westby

Hi, You can read the full transcript on https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Infrastructure/Meetings/2011-02-08 === Attendees === * James Westby * Michael Hudson * Mattias Backman * Guilherme Salgado === Agenda === * Team status reports * Action items from last meeting. * status.linaro.org overview * AOB === Action Items === * James to talk with Michael about requirement driving not wanting to host artefacts on Hudson === Action Items from Previous Meeting === * None === Minutes === * Team status reports * James Westby * series support for status.linaro.org was rolled out, so we now have burndowns that end at the right date * more things keep being requested for the status.linaro.org project, and most are worthy, so it's hard to draw it to a close * Guilherme Salgado * linaro-image-tools 0.4.3 release didn't have any regressions and there isn't any high priority bugs left there (for now) * plan: finish writing implementation plan for PatchTracking and start hacking Patchwork to do what we want it to * Mattias Backman * Borrowing some dev hardware to work with * Got approval for Budapest travel * A lot of overhead to request holes in the firewall * Michael Hudson * still don't really know what variants of android we want to build * people confusing requirements and implementation and not being very clear about either * plan: to talk to people such as patryk about what variants to build (doing that now in fact) * Michael said that something James had passed on from asac was implementation, not requirements. James will look at it further with Michael. * Actions from last meeting: None * status.linaro.org overview: James gave an overview of the architecture of the status.linaro.org code, where to get it, and some of the implementation details. * AOB * It was agreed that the new format for the meetings should be trialled for longer. Thanks, James

13 years, 10 months

Lava: Scope

by Paul Miles

Greetings Linaro-dev, I have joined the mailing list today and as a newbie Codethink(er) I am looking at contributing around the Linaro Validation area, especially Lava. My background is as a programme manager, generally around embedded mobile and have just completed a significant webkit based development project. First up on Linaro I have been digesting blueprints to get a feel for the Lava project scope and produce a system use-case (or story) list. The blueprints are not really giving me a system level picture that pulls together all the threads at the moment. Once I get this I can then spot some gaps where we can add value. Typical questions I am trying to answer are: What Mechanism is used by the community member to trigger/request an evaluation run? What needs to be provided by the community member in the evaluation package? What is the minimum? What will be present on the boards? Will the test run content be configurable by the evaluation requester? To this end, is there a Lava system-level requirement/scope? I have come across Linaro burn-down graphs, so maybe there is a Scrum type requirements backlog I can pick up on. Regards, Paul paul.miles(a)codethink.co.uk

13 years, 10 months

[PATCH 1/3] xloader-panda-add-0map4-gpio-base.patch

by Andy Green

From: Andy Green <andy.green(a)linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Andy Green <andy(a)warmcat.com> --- include/asm/arch-omap4/cpu.h | 3 +++ 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/asm/arch-omap4/cpu.h b/include/asm/arch-omap4/cpu.h index 4971ba4..b273356 100644 --- a/include/asm/arch-omap4/cpu.h +++ b/include/asm/arch-omap4/cpu.h @@ -442,6 +442,9 @@ #define I2C_BASE2 (OMAP44XX_L4_PER + 0x72000) #define I2C_BASE3 (OMAP44XX_L4_PER + 0x60000) +#define O4_GPIO_BASE 0x4a310000 +#define O4_GPIO_BASE2 0x48055000 + #ifdef CONFIG_LCD extern void lcd_disable(void); extern void lcd_panel_disable(void);

13 years, 10 months

Re: Re: v4l2 vs omx for camera

by SUBASH PATEL

13 years, 10 months

Re: v4l2 vs omx for camera

by SUBASH PATEL

Hi Sachin, I think when we speak of OMX, we are referring to the OMX-IL layer. This layer is supported as middleware component. I am putting down my experiences as below: - Generally Camera gives two streams. One is preview which can be YUV/RGB and another is capture (YUV/RGB/JPEG). Preview frame format must be in one of display systems supported(YUV/RGB) format. Else color conversion is required in the path. This adds overhead and latency. - If we have a camera sensor which is smart, i.e., it is capable of providing the processed image(RGB, YUV) frame rather than RAW pixel dump, and ARM is able to control the sensor interface, then V4L2 framework camera driver would work. User space wrapper/app would be invoking the V4L2 ioctl's to control the camera. - If we have a RAW sensor which produces, say Bayer pixel format, we will have to have an image pipe to process it before converting this to one of RGB/YUV formats. Image pipes involves conversions, resizing etc. It would be an overhead to do these stages in ARM, and some vendors have proprietary imaging processors for it. These processors may run a custom RTOS. They may have built a private IPC layer into linux kernel and proprietary OS. OMX layer works in such scenarios. A concept called distributed OMX works on RPC mechanism. OMX client calls will now land up on the image processor from ARM. Again some proprietary driver/s will be invoked from the remote OMX component which would do the image processing mentioned above. User space wrapper/app aka OMX client, is a set of OMX calls, which will get routed to proper OMX component through OMX core. This is similar to V4L2 client, but instead of controlling camera through IOCTL's, we use OMX specific functions Get/Set methods. From my view, the choice of choosing V4L2 or OMX is basically depending on the type of sensors and presence of dedicated hardware. If we already have a dedicated imaging processor, V4L2 can be absent, and we will have to leverage the OMX because of its capability. But if we are integrating a new sensor which has in-built accelerator, it makes sense to reduce the silicon area on SoC and use V4L2 instead. Regards, Subash -------Original Message-------- Sent: Sachin Gupta <sachin.gupta(a)linaro.org> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 14:25:21 +0530 Subject: Re: v4l2 vs omx for camera Arnd, you are correct that omx and v4l2 sit at different levels one being userside API and other being kernel API.But from the point of view of integrating these API's in OS frameworks like gstreamer,Android camera service they are at the same level.I mean one will have to implement gstreamer source plugin based on either v4l2 or Omx.Also the way vendors(STE and TI) have gone about implementing OMX, they completely bypass v4l2 .The major reason being code sharing among different OS environments.The kernel side for OMX implementation just facilitates RPC between imaging coprocessor and ARM side.. Sachin On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones(a)linaro.org> wrote: Bringing in my boys. Robert, Linus, what say you? On 07/02/11 12:33, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 07 February 2011, Sachin Gupta wrote: >> In Multimedia WG we have been posed with a question regarding best way >> to expose low level API for camera.so this a questions mainly about pros and >> cons of v4l2 and omx over each other.So to involve a wider community to >> discuss this topic I am floating this mail on linaro-dev.Please share your >> view/experiences.Also please involve any body else in this mail who can >> provide valuable inputs on this. > I've had to look up with "omx" actually stands for [1][2], but from > an outsider view, they don't seem to be mutually exclusive or even > competing interfaces. v4l2 is the interface you use to get at camera > data, in whatever format the camera gives you. There are no alternatives > to that. OpenMax gives you a way to accelerate video codecs, which > is good, but this sits a layer higher up in the stack. Supporting omx > is probably a good idea, but would be totally optional. > > Arnd > > [1] http://www.khronos.org/openmax/ > [2] http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/GstOpenMAX > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-dev mailing list > linaro-dev(a)lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev(a)lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev -------Original Message-------- Sent: Loïc Minier <loic.minier(a)linaro.org> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:35:38 +0100 Subject: Re: Efikamx bootloader help hey adding my bits where I can On Tue, Feb 08, 2011, Eric Miao wrote: > 2. The three possible boot up methods: a) Internal SPI NOR flash, b) the > MicroSD card behind the battery and c) the normal SD card at the left > side, not really sure about the situation on Efika MX (smart top) as > I don't have one in my hands efikamx only has SD and internal flash; there might be other boot methods like serial or USB, but I don't think we need to care too much about these > 4. The boot sequence of the Internal SPI NOR flash, as it looks to me that > it's trying to find boot.scr from either the MicroSD or SD card on the > first partition? Also it would be helpful to document the envionment > variables of this specific u-boot. on my efikamx, this is the bootcmd it had when I received it and corresponding variables: bootcmd=run pata_boot pata_boot=run bootargs_base bootargs_pata bootargs_base=setenv bootargs noinitrd console=ttymxc0,115200 console=tty1 bootargs_pata=setenv bootargs ${bootargs} root=/dev/sda2 ${bootinfo};run boot_pata bootinfo=rw boot_pata=run base_cmds;ide reset;fatload ide 0:1 ${loadaddr} ${kernel}; bootm ${loadaddr} base_cmds=run base_cmd1;run base_cmd2;run base_cmd3;run base_cmd4;run base_cmd5;run base_cmd99 loadaddr=0x90007FC0 kernel=uImage base_cmd1=pmic 15 0x00400022;mw.l 0x73fa84b8 0xe7 1;mw.l 0x73fd4014 0x59239100 1 base_cmd2=mw.l 0x83fd9010 0xcaaaf6d0 1;mw.l 0x73f88000 0x01025200 1;mw.l 0x73f84000 0x20 1 base_cmd3=mw.l 0x83fd9004 0x333574aa 1;mw.l 0x83fd900c 0x333574aa 1; base_cmd4=mw.l 0x83fd9020 0x00f48b00 1;mw.l 0x83fd9024 0x00f49700 1;mw.l 0x83fd9028 0x00f48700 1 base_cmd5=mw.l 0x83fd902c 0x00f48400 1;mw.l 0x83fd9030 0x00f44e00 1; > 5. If Linaro is going to support u-boot for Efika MX/SB, it's better to > follow what is in upstream. However, there could be some differences > between the u-boot in the recovery/installing image downloadable from > powerdeveloper.org and the one in upstream. We might need to figure > out those differences and see how to handle them. That was indeed the case; Marex, who developed the upstream u-boot bits, told me the same u-boot would work on SD and on flash; the one I've built from mainline uses the default imximage.cfg settings which is "BOOT_FROM spi", yet works fine from a SD card. So it seems the same u-boot can be used for both SD and flash -- just with different bootcmd. Cheers, -- Loïc Minier

13 years, 10 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-dev