Message ID | cover.1704632056.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | Add support for BeaglePlay | expand |
07/01/2024 14:54, 'Jan Kiszka' via isar-users wrote: > This adds basic support for the BeaglePlay, a TI AM62x based ARM64 > board (https://www.beagleboard.org/boards/beagleplay). The integration > is upstream-based: U-Boot 2024.01-rc6, TF-A 2.10, OP-TEE 4.0.0 and > kernel 6.6.10. Major features are working but others may not > (upstream-based integrations are still uncommon...). > > Patch 1 obsoletes patch 8 from the recent RISC-V series > (https://groups.google.com/g/isar-users/c/0QBjhzcs3ac/m/slLUMUUbBAAJ). > > Still on my todo list is demoing RPMB and fTPM on this board, altough it > does not support real security (GP variant only). > > Jan Hello Jan, Please cover this target under full CI in the next version of patchset if any.
On 08.01.24 09:51, Anton Mikanovich wrote: > 07/01/2024 14:54, 'Jan Kiszka' via isar-users wrote: >> This adds basic support for the BeaglePlay, a TI AM62x based ARM64 >> board (https://www.beagleboard.org/boards/beagleplay). The integration >> is upstream-based: U-Boot 2024.01-rc6, TF-A 2.10, OP-TEE 4.0.0 and >> kernel 6.6.10. Major features are working but others may not >> (upstream-based integrations are still uncommon...). >> >> Patch 1 obsoletes patch 8 from the recent RISC-V series >> (https://groups.google.com/g/isar-users/c/0QBjhzcs3ac/m/slLUMUUbBAAJ). >> >> Still on my todo list is demoing RPMB and fTPM on this board, altough it >> does not support real security (GP variant only). >> >> Jan > > Hello Jan, > > Please cover this target under full CI in the next version of patchset > if any. Sure - but where exactly? CrossTest? Jan
On 08.01.24 14:53, Anton Mikanovich wrote: > 08/01/2024 14:18, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Sure - but where exactly? CrossTest? >> >> Jan >> > We don't have full-cross test cases jet, but this rebuild is already > scheduled. > So currently the only option is: test_nocross() > And when we will rebuild full CI into two major test cases (full-cross + > full+nocross) it will go to cross. I just don't want another no-cross kernel build added to the CI test - wasted resources. It seem hikey is already in the same boat, but we should not do ANY non-cross kernel build in CI in fact. Jan