[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: dts: sun8i: Add Allwinner A83T dtsi

[Vishnu Patekar]

Hello Maxime,
Sorry for delayed response.

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 4:20 AM, Maxime Ripard
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 07:46:16AM +0800, Vishnu Patekar wrote:
>> + memory {
>> + reg = <0x4000 0x8000>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + timer {
>> + compatible = "arm,armv7-timer";
>> + interrupts = > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
>> +  > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
>> +  > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
>> +  > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>;
>
> Shouldn't the number of CPUs be 8?
Yes, It should be 8, also need to change in gic node to 8 CPUs.
No, smp support till now, still I'll change it in next patch version.
>
>> + clock-frequency = <2400>;
>> + arm,cpu-registers-not-fw-configured;
>> + };
>
> Is there some u-boot support for this SoC yet?
recently, I've posted the v2 of u-boot patch.
>
> If so, both the memory node and the clock-frequency and
> arm,cpu-registers-not-fw-configured properties are useless (and
> harmful for the latter).
Correct, As, timer support is added in u-boot, I'll remove these two.
>
>> + soc@01c0 {
>
> Please remove the address. It's both wrong and useless.
>
>> + compatible = "simple-bus";
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges;
>> +
>> + gic: interrupt-controller@01c81000 {
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a7-gic", "arm,cortex-a15-gic";
>> + reg = <0x01c81000 0x1000>,
>> +   <0x01c82000 0x1000>,
>> +   <0x01c84000 0x2000>,
>> +   <0x01c86000 0x2000>;
>> + interrupt-controller;
>> + #interrupt-cells = <3>;
>> + interrupts = > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + pio: pinctrl@01c20800 {
>> + compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a83t-pinctrl";
>> + interrupts = ,
>> + ,
>> + ;
>
> Please align these lines with the first one, like you did for the
> GIC's reg for example.
Okie.
>
>> + reg = <0x01c20800 0x400>;
>> + clocks = <>;
>> + gpio-controller;
>> + interrupt-controller;
>> + #interrupt-cells = <3>;
>> + #gpio-cells = <3>;
>> +
>> + i2c0_pins_a: i2c0@0 {
>> + allwinner,pins = "PH0", "PH1";
>> + allwinner,function = "i2c0";
>> + allwinner,drive = ;
>> + allwinner,pull = ;
>> + };
>> +
>> + i2c1_pins_a: i2c1@0 {
>> + allwinner,pins = "PH2", "PH3";
>> + allwinner,function = "i2c1";
>> + allwinner,drive = ;
>> + allwinner,pull = ;
>> + };
>> +
>> + i2c2_pins_a: i2c2@0 {
>> + allwinner,pins = "PH4", "PH5";
>> + allwinner,function = "i2c2";
>> + allwinner,drive = ;
>> + allwinner,pull = ;
>> + };
>> +
>> + mmc0_pins_a: mmc0@0 {
>> + allwinner,pins = "PF0", "PF1", "PF2",
>> +  "PF3", "PF4", "PF5";
>> + allwinner,function = "mmc0";
>> + allwinner,drive = ;
>> + allwinner,pull = ;
>> + };
>> +
>> + mmc1_pins_a: mmc1@0 {
>> + allwinner,pins = "PG0", "PG1", "PG2",
>> +  "PG3", "PG4", "PG5";
>> + allwinner,function = "mmc1";
>> + allwinner,drive = ;
>> + allwinner,pull = ;
>> + };
>> +
>> + mmc2_8bit_pins: mmc2_8bit {
>> + allwinner,pins = "PC5", "PC6", "PC8",
>> +  "PC9", "PC10", "PC11",
>> +  "PC12", "PC13", "PC14",
>> +  "PC15";
>> + allwinner,function = "mmc2";
>> + allwinner,drive = ;
>> + allwinner,pull = ;
>> + };
>> +
>> + uart0_pins_a: uart0@0 {
>> + allwinner,pins = "PF2", "PF4";
>> + allwinner,function = "uart0";
>> + allwinner,drive = ;
>> 

Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: 3.4.104 on A10?

[Rudi]

Hi Igor,

(funny to see the same people in different forums ;)

> + upgrade all the way to .110 I can confirm it's working fine on Cubieboard 1 
> Note that patches
> not need just work out of the box. I  to fix them. If you want to tray, you 
> can find them 
> here: https://github.com/igorpecovnik/lib/tree/second/patch/kernel 
> (patch-103-104, 104-105, ...)

Thanks for the pointer. Maybe I'll try them, but it's all about spare time...


> I use my own configuration and a bundle of patches over it but even without 
> it should work just fine.

Just out of curiosity: Do you have CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER, 
CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER
and CONFIG_SECCOMP enabled?

Forthermore, does this:

# CONFIG_KERNEL_GZIP is not set
# CONFIG_KERNEL_LZMA is not set
# CONFIG_KERNEL_XZ is not set
CONFIG_KERNEL_LZO=y

work for you ?



-- 

Ruediger "Rudi" Ihle


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: sunxi: Introduce Allwinner for A83T support

[Vishnu Patekar]

Hello,
Sorry for delayed response.

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Chen-Yu Tsai  wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Vishnu Patekar
>  wrote:
>> Allwinner A83T is octa-core cortex-a7 based SoC.
>> It's clock control unit and prcm, pinmux are different from previous sun8i
>> series.
>> Its processor cores are arragned in two clusters 4 cores each,
>> similar to A80.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vishnu Patekar 
>
> Could you also update Documentation/arm/sunxi/README, so it says A83T
> is supported?
I'll update and send next version.
>
> Otherwise,
>
> Acked-by: Chen-Yu Tsai 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [linux-sunxi] Requesting Help on a USD15, Allwinner Quadcore 1.2Ghz 64-bit A53 Hardware

[Luc Verhaegen]

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 05:43:45PM -0800, KH Goh wrote:
> Hi Luc Verhaegen,
> Thanks for your advise, we get what you are saying. From our side, we are 
> trying out best to work closely with the open source community and trying 
> to do our part as much as possibly can.  We are committed to make our 
> hardware and software as open as possible, but subject to the license 
> agreement that place upon us by our supplier. But by having a good 
> relationship between us and the supplier, I think we should be able to iron 
> out most of the problem.
> 
> In terms of the hardware, at the moment we are having 2 unit of Pine64 
> Engineering board (Please refer here for the spec http://pine64.com/product 
> ), and would like to donate it to the community for further evaluation and 
> testing. Since we are a newcomer in this community, we would like you to 
> advise us on who and where should we send the 2 board to.
> 
> Thanks for your advise and appreciate your kind assistance.
> Regards,
> KH Goh
> 
> 
> On Saturday, November 28, 2015 at 9:01:31 PM UTC+8, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 12:38:16AM -0800, khg...@gmail.com  
> > wrote: 
> >
> > Thanks for contacting the canonical source of most things 
> > sunxi/allwinner before actually launching your kickstarter campaign. 
> >
> > This is the first time since the original cubieboard that such a thing 
> > has happened. Many companies with similar products only afterwards find 
> > out to what extent they do depend on the linux-sunxi community, and then 
> > change their story in either direction. Often the work done by the 
> > people of the linux-sunxi community gets used directly, cloned/forked, 
> > and nothing is ever given back. 
> >
> > As you can see, we (and while i do not speak for all of us, i know that 
> > i am not alone here) are sceptical about whoever approaches us like 
> > this, especially when one of the first statements is "budget 
> > constraints". You cannot expect the linux-sunxi community to do your 
> > work for you for free. 
> >
> > You should however donate boards to many known and active linux-sunxi 
> > developers, but for that you must not expect anything in return. 
> > Whatever then happens, happens, or it doesn't. The results are usually 
> > quite positive, especially given the limited cost of said boards, but it 
> > will hardly ever consist of full support for your product (especially 
> > when based on a new SoC variant). 
> >
> > If you wish to have more complete support, you can always try to hire 
> > known linux-sunxi developers directly, or work with those members of our 
> > community who do contracting. The choice is up to you. 
> >
> > Thanks for reaching out to us before launching your marketing campaign, 
> > i hope that your collaboration with linux-sunxi ends up being just as 
> > fruitful as your kickstarter. 
> 
> Thanks for your advise, we get what you are saying. From our side, we are
> trying out best to work closely with the open source community and trying
> to do our part as much as possibly can.  We are committed to make our  
> hardware and software as open as possible, but subject to the license
> agreement that place upon us by our supplier. But by having a good
> relationship between us and the supplier, I think we should be able to iron
> out most of the problem.

That last sentence reads, to me, as; "we will work out all product 
support issues with our supplier" (being allwinner).

That then makes me wonder how far along you are with developing 
software support for your product. You will be amazed to what extent you 
do depend on linux-sunxi, for a very broad range of what you would call 
product support.

I do wish to warn you though, about the use of the term "open source 
platform". Be very careful with your marketing there:
1) I see no indication that your product will be "open source hardware"
(OSHW), like with Olimex devices.
2) Allwinner is known to ship binary, GPL violating, blobs and to need 
hard convincing to change this. The status of their ffmpeg LGPL 
violation is still very questionable, but has entered a dark grey zone 
now, where legal action is a toss-up. Allwinner, and its customers, had 
to be forced, hard, and even then did only as much as they could get 
away with.
3) Due to the hardware you are using, you are going to have non open 
source software (CedarX, Mali).

All three of the above make your statement that "The PINE64 platform is 
fully open source" very questionable.

So given both of the above points, i implore you to do more than your 
competition, otherwise you will risk becoming yet another $shit_pi 
creating vendor, joining the ranks of bananapi and orangepi, and a 
whole bunch of companies/boards just like them.

> In terms of the hardware, at the moment we are having 2 unit of Pine64
> Engineering board (Please refer here for the spec http://pine64.com/product
> ), and would like to donate it to the community for further evaluation and
>