defconfigs: add sama5d3 support

From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>

Defconfig file for boards based on sama5d3x devices.

Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
---

Hi,

This is a basic defconf file for sama5d3 devices. at91boostrap, u-boot, linux
stuff will come later.

From the top of my head Alexandre Belloni told me that some flags have to be
added for hardware floating point use. It was on a previous version when
hard floating has been introduced. Is it still true or does selecting EABIHF is
enough?

Regards

Ludovic

 configs/sama5d3_defconfig |  104 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 104 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 configs/sama5d3_defconfig

>>>>>   <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> writes:

 > From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
 > Defconfig file for boards based on sama5d3x devices.

 > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
 > ---

 > Hi,

 > This is a basic defconf file for sama5d3 devices. at91boostrap, u-boot, linux
 > stuff will come later.

Thanks, but we prefer our defconfigs to just be the minimal needed to
configure buildroot for the hardware (arch/variant, bootloader, kernel)
- E.G. something like configs/nitrogen6x_defconfig

Care to send such a minimal defconfig with comments instead?

 >> From the top of my head Alexandre Belloni told me that some flags have to be
 > added for hardware floating point use. It was on a previous version when
 > hard floating has been introduced. Is it still true or does selecting EABIHF is
 > enough?

Selecting EABIHF should afaik be enough.

Hi Peter,

On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 10:06:13AM +0100, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> >>>>>   <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> writes:
> 
>  > From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
>  > Defconfig file for boards based on sama5d3x devices.
> 
>  > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
>  > ---
> 
>  > Hi,
> 
>  > This is a basic defconf file for sama5d3 devices. at91boostrap, u-boot, linux
>  > stuff will come later.
> 
> Thanks, but we prefer our defconfigs to just be the minimal needed to
> configure buildroot for the hardware (arch/variant, bootloader, kernel)
> - E.G. something like configs/nitrogen6x_defconfig

Ok

> 
> Care to send such a minimal defconfig with comments instead?

Sorry, not sure to have understood, you mean I have to put extra packages I
want as comments.

> 
>  >> From the top of my head Alexandre Belloni told me that some flags have to be
>  > added for hardware floating point use. It was on a previous version when
>  > hard floating has been introduced. Is it still true or does selecting EABIHF is
>  > enough?
> 
> Selecting EABIHF should afaik be enough.
> 
> -- 
> Bye, Peter Korsgaard

Regards

Ludovic

>>>>> "Ludovic" == Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> writes:

 >> Care to send such a minimal defconfig with comments instead?

 > Sorry, not sure to have understood, you mean I have to put extra packages I
 > want as comments.

No, please take a look at our other defconfigs (E.G. nitrogen6x):

# architecture
BR2_arm=y
BR2_cortex_a9=y

# system
BR2_TARGET_GENERIC_GETTY=y
BR2_TARGET_GENERIC_GETTY_PORT="ttymxc1"
BR2_ROOTFS_POST_BUILD_SCRIPT="board/boundarydevices/nitrogen6x/post-build.sh"

# filesystem
BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2=y
BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2_2r1=y

# bootloader
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT=y
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_BOARDNAME="nitrogen6q"
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_IMX=y
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="http://github.com/boundarydevices/u-boot-imx6/tarball/4034391/u-boot-4034391.tar.gz"

# kernel
BR2_LINUX_KERNEL=y
BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="http://github.com/boundarydevices/linux-imx6/tarball/5809938/linux-imx6-5809938.tar.gz"
BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DEFCONFIG="nitrogen6x"
BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_INSTALL_TARGET=y


It doesn't enable any usecase specific packages, just the needed
arch/getty/linux/bootloader configuration to start working from.

On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 01:47:33PM +0100, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> >>>>> "Ludovic" == Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> writes:
> 
>  >> Care to send such a minimal defconfig with comments instead?
> 
>  > Sorry, not sure to have understood, you mean I have to put extra packages I
>  > want as comments.
> 
> No, please take a look at our other defconfigs (E.G. nitrogen6x):

I had a look but I didn't understand what you mean by comments. So ok,
those kind of comments.

> 
> # architecture
> BR2_arm=y
> BR2_cortex_a9=y
> 
> # system
> BR2_TARGET_GENERIC_GETTY=y
> BR2_TARGET_GENERIC_GETTY_PORT="ttymxc1"
> BR2_ROOTFS_POST_BUILD_SCRIPT="board/boundarydevices/nitrogen6x/post-build.sh"
> 
> # filesystem
> BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2=y
> BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2_2r1=y
> 
> # bootloader
> BR2_TARGET_UBOOT=y
> BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_BOARDNAME="nitrogen6q"
> BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_IMX=y
> BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
> BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="http://github.com/boundarydevices/u-boot-imx6/tarball/4034391/u-boot-4034391.tar.gz"
> 
> # kernel
> BR2_LINUX_KERNEL=y
> BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
> BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="http://github.com/boundarydevices/linux-imx6/tarball/5809938/linux-imx6-5809938.tar.gz"
> BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DEFCONFIG="nitrogen6x"
> BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_INSTALL_TARGET=y
> 
> 
> It doesn't enable any usecase specific packages, just the needed
> arch/getty/linux/bootloader configuration to start working from.
> 

I understand this point of view and I am fine with it. But my concern is
that some customers want something working out of the box. For instance,
we often use devmem2 for debugging purpose or other tools such as
i2c-tools. It is easier for us to have it in a defconfig file.

I am not trying to convince you to take this defconfig as is! Just to
know if there is a way to provide specific packages? If not, it will be
provided only in our buildroot-at91 repository. I am also fine with
this, if the customer wants something out of the box then he'll have to
use our repository. Otherwise he could use buildroot one.


Regards

Ludovic

>>>>> "Ludovic" == Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> writes:

Hi,

 > I understand this point of view and I am fine with it. But my concern
 > is that some customers want something working out of the box. For
 > instance, we often use devmem2 for debugging purpose or other tools
 > such as i2c-tools. It is easier for us to have it in a defconfig
 > file.

 > I am not trying to convince you to take this defconfig as is! Just to
 > know if there is a way to provide specific packages? If not, it will
 > be provided only in our buildroot-at91 repository. I am also fine
 > with this, if the customer wants something out of the box then he'll
 > have to use our repository. Otherwise he could use buildroot one.

I understand. We're been discussing something like this a few times
(E.G. full blown "demo" defconfigs), but for now I prefer to keep the
variant in buildroot minimal.

On 04/02/14 15:24, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
>>>>>> "Ludovic" == Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> writes:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  > I understand this point of view and I am fine with it. But my concern
>  > is that some customers want something working out of the box. For
>  > instance, we often use devmem2 for debugging purpose or other tools
>  > such as i2c-tools. It is easier for us to have it in a defconfig
>  > file.
> 
>  > I am not trying to convince you to take this defconfig as is! Just to
>  > know if there is a way to provide specific packages? If not, it will
>  > be provided only in our buildroot-at91 repository. I am also fine
>  > with this, if the customer wants something out of the box then he'll
>  > have to use our repository. Otherwise he could use buildroot one.
> 
> I understand. We're been discussing something like this a few times
> (E.G. full blown "demo" defconfigs), but for now I prefer to keep the
> variant in buildroot minimal.

 However, we are OK with a minimal and a demo variant. So you can submit
one patch that builds a minimal config in configs/sama5d3_defconfig, and
a second patch that adds a demo defconfig in
configs/sama5d3_demo_multimedia_defconfig (it looks like you mainly add
multimedia packages, hence the name I chose, but you can take something
else of course).

 Regards,
 Arnout

On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 05:54:13PM +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> On 04/02/14 15:24, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> >>>>>> "Ludovic" == Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> writes:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> >  > I understand this point of view and I am fine with it. But my concern
> >  > is that some customers want something working out of the box. For
> >  > instance, we often use devmem2 for debugging purpose or other tools
> >  > such as i2c-tools. It is easier for us to have it in a defconfig
> >  > file.
> > 
> >  > I am not trying to convince you to take this defconfig as is! Just to
> >  > know if there is a way to provide specific packages? If not, it will
> >  > be provided only in our buildroot-at91 repository. I am also fine
> >  > with this, if the customer wants something out of the box then he'll
> >  > have to use our repository. Otherwise he could use buildroot one.
> > 
> > I understand. We're been discussing something like this a few times
> > (E.G. full blown "demo" defconfigs), but for now I prefer to keep the
> > variant in buildroot minimal.
> 
>  However, we are OK with a minimal and a demo variant. So you can submit
> one patch that builds a minimal config in configs/sama5d3_defconfig, and
> a second patch that adds a demo defconfig in
> configs/sama5d3_demo_multimedia_defconfig (it looks like you mainly add
> multimedia packages, hence the name I chose, but you can take something
> else of course).
> 

Once other components would be ready, I'll send a minimal defconfig and
a demo defconfig then I let you choose if you want to take both or not.

Regards

Ludovic

Ludovic,

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:55:26 +0100, ludovic.desroches@atmel.com wrote:
> From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
> 
> Defconfig file for boards based on sama5d3x devices.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>

Since you posted your patch, we have merged a defconfig for the SAMA5D3
Xplained board that matches the "requirements" of Buildroot in terms of
defconfig. See
http://git.buildroot.net/buildroot/commit/?id=54a653f649d131f8a038fc1314383b60294ad351.

So I'll mark your patch as Rejected in our patch tracking system.

Of course, feel free to send a new patch if you disagree with this
decision.

Thanks,

Thomas Petazzoni