[Buildroot] [PATCH v3 5/7] boot/beaglev-ddrinit: new package

[Khem Raj]

Hi Drew

On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 2:10 PM Drew Fustini <drew at beagleboard.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 9:02 AM Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 12:48 AM Drew Fustini <drew at beagleboard.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 12:37 AM Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Drew, All,
> > > >
> > > > On 2021-05-07 16:30 -0700, Drew Fustini spake thusly:
> > > > > On Fri, May 7, 2021, 15:04 Yann E. MORIN < [1]yann.morin.1998 at free.fr> wrote:
> > > > >   On 2021-05-04 22:51 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> > > > >   > This commit adds a package for the DDR initialization code used on the
> > > > >   > BeagleV platform.
> > > > >
> > > > >   The upstream package name is beaglev-ddrlnit, yes, with an 'l' instead
> > > > >   of an 'i'. I've renamed the package to match upstream name, so that
> > > > >   users that look for it can actually find it.
> > > > > Would it be helpful if I get StarFive to fix the typo and rename it to ddrinit?
> > > > > I am thinking that would probably be good to have happen before other projects
> > > > > start pointing to it. Thomas was so fast with the buildroot patches I think it
> > > > > is the first to notice this.
> > > >
> > > > It is not so important that the upstream name gets fixed; in fact quite
> > > > the opposite: we are now already referencing it. Granted, it's brand
> > > > new, and we can fix it quick before the release. But note that our
> > > > 2021.05-rc1 is due this WE, for example; we can still fix this kind of
> > > > thing post rc1, of course, but we can't fix a release...
> > > >
> > > > But as you mention, once other projects start referencing it, it will be
> > > > too late. For example, Khem Raj already has started such support:
> > > >
> > > >     https://github.com/riscv/meta-riscv/blob/master/beaglev.yml
> > > >     https://github.com/YoeDistro/yoe-distro/blob/master/beaglev-starlight-jh7100-envsetup.sh
> > > >
> > > > So even if it is still very early, I think it is already too late to
> > > > rename the repository...
> >
> > Is there general consensus on what it should be called ?
> > I am happy to remove references to SOC name, if we have clear naming
> > convention and strategy to also name future iterations of beagleV based on RISCV
>
> The board that Thomas and you received is the beta prototype version
> of BeagleV Starlight board with the StarFive JH7100 SoC, which is a
> low quantity test SoC.  BeagleV is BeagleBoard.org Foundation's name
> for RISC-V boards.  BeagleV Starlight is a BeagleBoard.org board with
> a StarFive RISC-V SoC.
>
> The production BeagleV Starlight will have the StarFive JH7110, the
> mass production SoC.  Due to the different SoC models, BeagleV
> Starlight JH7100 would refer to the beta prototype, and BeagleV
> Starlight JH7110 would be the product that will be launched later this
> year.
>
> That README is the best public URL to reference in documentation and
> patches and it includes guidance on naming conventions:
> https://github.com/beagleboard/beaglev-starlight#guidance-on-naming-conventions

So perhaps we could call this machine as beaglev-beta ? and the final
one beaglev in Yocto machine names ?
I am not sure adding SOC info adds some meaningful information, unless
you plan to have other SOCs also in
beagleV boards variants

>
> Thanks.
> Drew