I am assuming I can just recompile u-boot with console enabled normally, or maybe it already is enabled on production devices? Fairly sure I have all the source for that. I've been working on getting the tool-chain patches added. Here is my staging https://github.com/Lightsword1942/openwrtubicomstaging does it look like I'm doing everything right so far? I am using the code off of codeaurora I had mirrored it to github and the patches that were removed before, I will eventually try to integrate all the hardware devices using profiles from their GPL tarballs.
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 8:03 AM, Mike Baker <m...@openwrt.org> wrote: > You're close; ultra is the name given to the proprietary code that runs on > all the threads not running linux. The ubicom chipsets are hardware > multithreaded with 8-12 threads -- SMT, think of it as SMP but context > switching instead of concurrent. > > Ultra performs the board initialization and then spawns U-Boot on another > thread, and continues to run in parallel with Linux. The U-Boot console > should be enabled but it expects to talk to a programming dongle and not an > actual serial port. > > > > James Hilliard <james.hillia...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So, I think i more or less got the boot processes down, however I don't > have hardware with me right now. Boot goes from ultra>uboot>linux more or > less. From the looks of it getting a console on uboot should be fairly > straight forward. I'm going to attempt to compile an oem build with the > uboot console enabled that way we can debug and flash over Ethernet instead > of serial. Msg me on gtalk and ill send you some builds(this email). > > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:04 AM, michal-osowie...@o2.pl < > michal-osowie...@o2.pl> wrote: > >> Hi James >> AFAIR dir-657 soucecode has openwrt's port which compiles but has no >> ethernet switch enabled/ported. I's hard to test develop anything without >> flash programmer so i dropped testing. It would be nice if you could add >> this model to your work >> >> Thanks, >> Michal >> >> >> Dnia 16 października 2013 20:53 James Hilliard <james.hillia...@gmail.com> >> napisał(a): >> >> > I think i'll attempt to support this and get some >> vendor/deviceconfigs integrated, can the changes that removed arch support >> bereverted easily in trunk? I've been working off of 12.09 here >> https://github.com/Lightsword1942/openwrtubicom and manually merging >> some things let me know if you have anysuggestions. I'm not sure what >> this is using for include/siteand that's what I'm currently hung up >> on. >> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 6:11 AM, Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Hello, >> > 2013/9/16 James Hilliard <james.hillia...@gmail.com>: >> > > Anyone interested in OpenWRT on Ubicom? They used OpenWRTinternally so >> > > there is already source ready(may be a little outdatedthough). Also >> have >> > > some router specific sources of both it and stock. >> > OpenWrt did "support" the ubicom32 architecture for awhile, but since >> > this is a very quirky architecture and nobody could step up as a >> > maintainer, it got removed. Unless you are willing to support that >> > architecture, I see no point in supporting it since it reallyrequired >> > a lot of quirks (special "hypervisor" software,bootloader and !MMU). >> > -- >> > Florian >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > openwrt-devel mailing list >> > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org >> > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > openwrt-devel mailing list >> > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org >> > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel >> > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel > >
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
