On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 03:14:33PM +0000, kevin.e.cri...@l3harris.com wrote: > I created a Yocto Project Bugzilla bug (13517) for this problem. Randy > MacLeod said "meta-ti is not tracked in this bugzilla. Please contact the > BSP owner".
> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13517 > > What is the correct procedure for reporting problems with the meta-ti layer? Kevin, Thank you for the report. Regarding the use of Yocto Project bugzilla for metat-ti bugs - I've discussed this with fellow Yocto Project TSC members and there's a confusion caused by limited resources. We'll try to get this sorted out... Meanwhile, as of the booting issue itself. As you can see, meta-ti uses TI "staging" tree, where active development for current and latest platforms happens during the upstreaming process. OMAP3 SOC is 10-15 years old and what is called a legacy device. It has been fully supported in mainline Linux kernel for many years. Yes, TI is also responsible for maintaining existing support in the mainline kernel and ensuring no regressions. But that is not against the TI "staging" tree - i.e. there's no active testing being done of meta-ti working on OMAP3 platforms like Beagleboard-xM, unfortunately. This is left to corresponding communities, such as Beagleboard.org I'll see what I can do to get this looked at in meta-ti. Otherwise, do you see any issues using a mainline kernel for your platform? Thanks. -- Denys -- _______________________________________________ meta-ti mailing list meta-ti@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
