On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:48 AM, Paul Boddie <p...@boddie.org.uk> wrote: > On Thursday 2. March 2017 22.20.27 Siarhei Siamashka wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton >> >> <l...@lkcl.net> wrote: >> > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:49 AM, zap <zap...@openmailbox.org> wrote: >> > reverse-engineering i have come to the conclusion is a total - and >> > >> > criminal - waste of time and effort. by the time all features are >> > 100% stable it's several YEARS down the line. look at how long ago >> > the A64 was released, and the libdram code STILL HAS NOT BEEN >> > REVERSE-ENGINEERED. it's 200 lines of code for fuck's sake. >> >> You are just very poorly informed about the status of A64 support. >> And it's quite funny that there are people who believe you rather >> than trying to get this information first hand. > > Well, I posted the results of some enquiries a few weeks ago in the context of > the Olimex laptop. Everything sounded very promising until this appeared: > > "For the moment the only working Linux Kernel which supports all A64 features > is the Allwinner Android Kernel. This Kernel is full of binary blobs, but the > only one which could be used for demo. Beside the binary blobs many other > things are broken, like the power management, different drivers like the LCD > backlight PWM, wake up from suspend, eDP converter is not set properly and > works just in 15 bit color mode etc etc. We have the hardware for 50 laptops > ready (developer edition), but we do not want to ship before we take care for > the software. At other hand we do not want to ship TERES I with Android or > RemixOS also which are complete with binary blobs and will never be Open > Source." > > Source: https://olimex.wordpress.com/2017/02/07/fosdem-and-teres-i-update/ > > Some of that is specific to their laptop, but some of it seems relevant to any > A64 device. Maybe you could reconcile what the Olimex people are saying with > what you are claiming.
I guess, the emphasis was on *all* A64 features. And the mainline kernel clearly does not support *all* A64 features yet. Also Olimex people are always saying that they don't do software and don't have software expertise in-house. The are not the best people to ask for this information. > If you have any definitive information to the contrary, particularly about the > boot0 code that Luke appears to be referring to, please post links to it. Regarding Luke's claim stated in bold letters, here is the commit in the mainline U-Boot, which has added the A64 DRAM controller support: http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=1bc464be1fc559a3f6dc1334297245d5b27b9b57 But the reverse engineered A64 DRAM controller support code existed in experimental git branches many months before it finally landed upstream and anyone could try it. > The linux-sunxi wiki was very vague on such matters last time I checked. > And yes, I have seen the "mainlining effort" page: > > https://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort#Status_Matrix It's very good that you have found this page. You can clearly see many links to the work-in progress branches that are used for developing various drivers and test them. If you don't understand something, you can always join the #linux-sunxi irc channel on freenode and ask around. -- Best regards, Siarhei Siamashka _______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk