Hi John, I have submit a new pull request and post a simple test log, please check: https://github.com/lede-project/source/pull/344
V6 patch update summary: 1.Dropping unnecessary USB_EHCI_FSL related patches. 2.Change BOARDNAME from "layerscape" to "NXP Layerscape" Thanks & Best Regards Jiang Yutang > -----Original Message----- > From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org] > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 1:58 PM > To: Y.T. Jiang > Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > > Ok, > > please also make this change in target/linux/layerscape/Makefile > > BOARDNAME:=layerscape > > to > > BOARDNAME:=NXP Layerscape > > > John > > On 28/09/2016 07:34, Y.T. Jiang wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org] > >> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 1:16 PM > >> To: Y.T. Jiang > >> Cc: LEDE Development List > >> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > >> > >> > >> > >> On 27/09/2016 13:39, Y.T. Jiang wrote: > >>> Hi John, > >>> > >>> After the survey found, the error are from a old > >>> usb2.0(USB_EHCI_FSL) > >> driver which is usually used for powerpc arch, not for layerscape > >> ls1043ardb(arm64 arch) Soc. > >>> The default kernel config and packages not enable the old usb2.0 > >>> driver > >> in my patch. It should be enabled by: > >>> [x] Select all target specific packages by default [x] Select all > >>> kernel module packages by default [x] Select all userspace packages > >>> by > >>> > >>> Further investigation found, if remove the kernel patch 8041, can > >>> avoid > >> USB_EHCI_FSL be compiled. But the patch hint, USB_EHCI_FSL will > >> appear in other arch. > >>> 8041-usb-kconfig-remove-dependency-FSL_SOC-for-ehci-fsl-d.patch > >>> "usb: kconfig: remove dependency FSL_SOC for ehci fsl driver " > >>> CONFIG_USB_EHCI_FSL is not dependent on FSL_SOC, it can be built on > >> non-PPC platforms. > >>> ... > >>> 21 config USB_EHCI_FSL > >>> 22 tristate "Support for Freescale PPC on-chip EHCI USB > >> controller" > >>> 23 - depends on FSL_SOC > >>> 24 + depends on USB_EHCI_HCD > >>> ... > >>> > >> > >> so this patch is indeed added by your series, yet the module does not > >> build. i would suggest dropping this patch as it seems totally > >> unrelated and in fact makes it not work. does your target use FSL EHCI > support ? > >> > >> John > >> > > Yes, I double check the patches, it not need indeed. In fact, some > patches was backported by other colleagues, who not familiar with special > IP block and mixed with other unnecessary patches. I will drop it and > create a new patch, after functional validation then submit a new pull > request. Thank you John. > > [Y.T. Jiang] > > > >>> If have other better ways in dealing with the dependencies in LEDE? > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks & Best Regards > >>> Jiang Yutang > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: John Crispin [mailto:j...@phrozen.org] > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 2:34 PM > >>>> To: Y.T. Jiang > >>>> Cc: LEDE Development List > >>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> i just tried V5 and when building the target with all packages > >>>> selected i run into some errors > >>>> > >>>> make[5]: Entering directory > >>>> `/home/blogic/source/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/l > >>>> in > >>>> ux- > >>>> layerscape_64b/linux-4.4.21' > >>>> CHK include/config/kernel.release > >>>> CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/bounds.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/timeconst.h > >>>> CHK include/generated/asm-offsets.h > >>>> CALL scripts/checksyscalls.sh > >>>> CC [M] drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.o In file included from > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:39:0: > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_readl': > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:741:9: error: implicit declaration of > >>>> function 'readl' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>>> return readl(regs); > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_writel': > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:768:3: error: implicit declaration of > >>>> function 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>>> writel(val, regs); > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'fsl_ehci_drv_probe': > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:130:3: error: implicit declaration of > >>>> function 'clrsetbits_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>>> clrsetbits_be32(hcd->regs + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL, > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_setup_phy': > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:205:4: error: implicit declaration of > >>>> function 'clrbits32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>>> clrbits32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL, > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:244:9: error: implicit declaration of > >>>> function 'in_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>>> if (!(in_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL) & PHY_CLK_VALID)) { > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_usb_setup': > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:276:3: error: implicit declaration of > >>>> function 'out_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>>> out_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_SNOOP1, 0x0 | SNOOP_SIZE_2GB); > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:9: error: implicit declaration of > >>>> function 'mfspr' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>>> svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR); > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: error: 'SPRN_SVR' undeclared > >>>> (first use in this function) > >>>> svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR); > >>>> ^ > >>>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: note: each undeclared > >>>> identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in > >>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > >>>> > >>>> to reproduce this run menuconfig and then Global build settings ---> > >>>> [x] Select all target specific packages by default > >>>> [x] Select all kernel module packages by default > >>>> [x] Select all userspace packages by default > >>>> > >>>> John > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 21/09/2016 16:21, Y.T. Jiang wrote: > >>>>> Hi Rafał and John, > >>>>> > >>>>> I update the patch and pull a new requests(329), please check and > >>>> review, thanks! > >>>>> https://github.com/lede-project/source/pull/329 > >>>>> > >>>>> V5 patch update summary: > >>>>> 1.Copyrights assigned to myself. > >>>>> 2.Introduce DEVICE_TITLE and DEVICE_PACKAGES. > >>>>> 3.Rename patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx... > >>>>> 4.Refresh patches by "make target/linux/refresh V=s" > >>>>> 5.Move default packages to DEFAULT_PACKAGES. > >>>>> 6.Optimize Build/mk_firmware. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks & Best Regards > >>>>> Jiang Yutang > >>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Lede-dev [mailto:lede-dev-boun...@lists.infradead.org] On > >>>>>> Behalf Of Y.T. Jiang > >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:28 PM > >>>>>> To: Rafa? Mi?ecki > >>>>>> Cc: LEDE Development List; John Crispin > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Rafał, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you for the detailed comment! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Update status: > >>>>>> prefixed with ">" --done > >>>>>> Copyright --done > >>>>>> make target/linux/refresh V=s --done > >>>>>> Patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx...refer target/linux/generic/PATCHES > >>>>>> --done > >>>>>> using DEVICE_TITLE DEVICE_PACKAGES...refer > >>>>>> target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile --ongoing > >>>>>> > >>>>>> After building and features validate, I will submit a new version > >>>> patch. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks & Best Regards > >>>>>> Jiang Yutang > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] > >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 7:55 PM > >>>>>>> To: Y.T. Jiang > >>>>>>> Cc: John Crispin; LEDE Development List > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 19 September 2016 at 12:36, Y.T. Jiang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> Thank you for your review and suggestion. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Sure. One more note: please take a look at your mailer > >> configuration. > >>>>>>> It should keep all quotes prefixed with "> " to keep discussion > >> clear. > >>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_quoting > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zaj...@gmail.com] > >>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 4:01 PM > >>>>>>>> To: John Crispin > >>>>>>>> Cc: LEDE Development List; Y.T. Jiang > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 18 September 2016 at 14:24, John Crispin <j...@phrozen.org> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> i have just spent some time reviewing the layerscape PR [1] > >>>>>>>>> and started a full build of it. its starting to look good and > >>>>>>>>> i cannot see any blockers. if anyone has any hold on this > >>>>>>>>> please let me know in the next couple of days. if i dont get > >>>>>>>>> any vetos i will > >>>> merge it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I can see following Copyright line over and over: > >>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org > >>>>>>>> Yutang: did you really sign a contract with OpenWrt that > >>>>>>>> included > >>>>>>> passing your copyrights to the OpenWrt project? If not, you > >>>>>>> should just keep Copyrights assigned to yourself. > >>>>>>>> I really would like assigning copyrights to projects where it > >>>>>>>> doesn't > >>>>>>> apply. > >>>>>>>> [I do not sign a contract with OpenWrt indeed. I refer to some > >>>>>>>> others target while developing/backporting layerscape, I find > >>>>>>>> almost of targets included OpenWrt.org Copyright, so I also put > >>>>>>>> it in my code files. Now should I replace " Copyright (C) 2016 > >>>> OpenWrt.org" > >>>>>> with " > >>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ? or > >>>>>>>> retain the both copyright: "Copyright (C) LEDE project, Jiang > >>>>>>>> Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com>" ?] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You're correct, current sources are messy about this. I'm trying > >>>>>>> to stop adding mode incorrectly copyrighted code. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You should only have something like: > >>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.ji...@nxp.com> for the > >>>>>>> code you have written. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> What about using some generic profile only and then using > >>>>>>>> DEVICE_TITLE > >>>>>>> DEVICE_PACKAGES to specify modules that should be included on > >> rootfs? > >>>>>>>> [I will try to use the two variables.] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks! This will allow building images for customized boards > >>>>>>> with a single "make" call. It's part of recently introduced > >>>>>>> TARGET_PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS system. You may take a look at > >>>>>>> target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile as an example. There is only > >>>>>>> 1 subtarget, but it should give you a hint anyway. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Would that be possible to split patches into accepted ones > >>>>>>>> (backports) > >>>>>>> and LEDE-specific ones? > >>>>>>>> [The kernel patches: dpaa/qbman/fman/etc. it is really too big > >>>>>>>> and interference review LEDE-specially code. I will split those > >>>>>>>> kernel patches in folder patches-4.4 as the second, and keep > >>>>>>>> the rest as fist LEDE-specific, what do you think about it?] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> For generic patches we have a following guide: > >>>>>>> target/linux/generic/PATCHES > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You may try to follow this, if possible. E.g. you could use 0xxx > >>>>>>> prefix for upstream accepted patches and some other prefix 1xxx, > >>>>>>> 2xxx, or whatever applicable for other ones. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It isn't a strict rule for targets, but it should make your > >>>>>>> target easier to maintain I believe. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please refresh all target patches, right now I can see they > >>>>>>>> contain all > >>>>>>> these things like: > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index > >>>>>>>> 4cb98aa..a8a97bd 100644 > >>>>>>>> 1.7.9.5 > >>>>>>>> [I found it have conflicts in current kernel version with two > >>>>>>>> patches(arm64/mm related, 0060 and 0061) while backporting the > >>>>>>>> dpaa/qbman/fman driver, but I'm unacquainted with both mm and > >>>>>>>> dpaa, our dpaa team are engaged in do upstream work and can't > >>>>>>>> help me. So I revert the two patch to bypass this issue > >>>>>>>> temporary, I would like to wait for more leisure time then to > >>>>>>>> thorough investigate and solve it.] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think you misunderstood me. I don't have anything against your > >>>>>>> patches, just the format. Please call make target/linux/refresh > >>>>>>> V=s and that will convert all your patches to the expected > >>>>>>> format > >>>>>>> :) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Rafał > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> Lede-dev mailing list > >>>>>> Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org > >>>>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev > > _______________________________________________ > > Lede-dev mailing list > > Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev > > _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
