[PATCH 1/1] arm: add touchbook support
gregoire at alwaysinnovating.com
Fri Nov 26 12:04:15 EST 2010
I get it now! Sorry for the confusion.
Perhaps, I will try one day - there was another guy who nicely offered
me to do some testing, but we didn't make the deal.
To be honest, my objective would be to get rid of u-boot (barebox) or
any middle stack. Right now, for the Touch Book, I'm setting up three
times the pins and the environment: x-load, u-boot, linux-omap. That's
crazy! And u-boot doesn't bring anything to the user except an early
There was an interesting work made by a guy three months ago about
integrating everything up into the kernel. No x-load, no u-boot, no
barebox. If I had time, it's something that I would investigate.
Simplification at the extreme, removing all duplicate stack and
programs, pushing everything up to the kernel.
I don't know if there any barebox work about such strategy...
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 10:16 +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
> I think you niss understand the ml this is barebox not linux-omap
> Best Regards,
> On 10:44 Thu 25 Nov , Gregoire Gentil wrote:
> > Sorry for the late answer. I'm not sure to have followed the whole
> > thread of this email.
> > The Touch Book is an OMAP-based device.
> > We sent to the mailing list some patches a while ago and we will update
> > those patches next month to the linux-omap mailing list.
> > Also, touchbook has its own CONFIG and own board file. It should not be
> > present in the beagleboard board file,
> > Grégoire
> > On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 14:26 +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > Halli Jürgen,
> > >
> > > > > + if (machine_is_touchbook())
> > > >
> > > > Where does the machine_is_touchbook() comes from?
> > > arch/arm/tools/mach-types + arch/arm/tools/gen-mach-types I guess.
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > > Uwe
> > >
More information about the barebox