[Arm-netbook] Planned boot process?

[lkcl luke]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Tom Cubie <tangliang at allwinnertech.com> wrote:

>>   perhaps if allwinner proposed it upstream, wrote documentation on it
>> etc. then it would stand a chance of upstream acceptance, but until
>> that happens the most sensible thing is probably to use devicetree.
>
>     I think Allwinner wants to push the kernel upstream(personally i
> like to see that happens), but they have no time and people to do this.

 alejandro is already working on it, for you - and for us - and for
the community :)

> None of the developers in Allwinner has the experience of doing some
> open source project, nor committing patches to the upsteam. I have asked
> my manager, and told him that we need the community to help. He is glad
> and said we will fully support the community to do this. So allwinner do
> want to push it upstream, just we don't what to do and how to do it. At
> least one thing is for sure, allwinner is friendly to the community and
> will be supporting the community.

 fantastic.  well, the one thing that's missing is documentation.  if
allwinner is willing to provide documentation - *without* requiring an
NDA - then i think you will automatically find that there are people
willing to work with you.

 however, one crucial thing is that there must be "reference boards"
available for people to play with!  if we were not doing the
EOMA-PCMCIA initiative, i would recommend that allwinner adapt the
Reference Board into a $150 clone of the BeagleBoard.

 but, i think, strategically, the EOMA-PCMCIA initiative has more
cross-over between mass-volume and engineering (R&D) whereas it still
requires a lot of R&D time - plus software expertise - to turn the
Reference Board from allwinner, or even a BeagleBoard, into a
mass-volume product.

 it is a long story :)

 l.