Project

General

Profile

DCDevice tree additions for custom camera + DSI/touch

Added by David Cuccia 8 days ago

Hi,

Starting a new thread based on previous success

We're porting our camera sensor (V4L2 subdev, I2C) and DSI panel + touch drivers — modules build fine against your SDK's kernel-devsrc. Curious what your recommended route is for the device-tree additions (sensor nodes on CSI0/CSI1 + CAMSS graph, panel under DSI0, touch on I2C)?

Options we see:

(a) DT overlay support in ABL/boot, if any
(b) a kas/Yocto fragment against your scarthgap layer that we build into a variant dtb and flash to dtb_a/b
(c) you carry a customer-variant dtb in the BSP

Which do you support/prefer, and is the dtb reflashable standalone (capsule?) without a full image flash?

Thanks!
David

related thread here for breadcrumbs: https://support.criticallink.com/redmine/boards/78/topics/7410


Replies (2)

DC RE: Device tree additions for custom camera + DSI/touch - Added by David Cuccia 7 days ago

Quick addendum that raises the stakes on this question: we tried sideloading our cross-compiled modules (built against your BSP 1.1 SDK's kernel-devsrc — clean vermagic match) onto a BSP 1.2 device, and they're rejected: the kernel has  CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE=y  and trusts only its build-time autogenerated key, which the SDK doesn't ship. So for out-of-tree drivers the realistic options seem to be:

(a) our module recipes + DT carried in your layer (signed by your build),
(b) we build the full image ourselves from your public kas/scarthgap setup (we own the key),
(c) a dev-variant kernel without  MODULE_SIG_FORCE  for bring-up.

Which flow do you support for customers shipping custom camera/panel drivers? (We noticed the QLI 2.0 prelim build has no module signing — handy for development.)

GG RE: Device tree additions for custom camera + DSI/touch - Added by Gregory Gluszek about 20 hours ago

Hi David,

We typically lean towards option b in your last reply (having a customer build the full image themselves, making any customization as needed on a fork they maintain). The https://support.criticallink.com/git/meta-mitysom-qc6490-5430-devkit.git repo is primarily intended/customized to support the MitySOM-QC Development Board, while also functioning as an example or starting point for other carrier boards designed for the MitySOM-QC.

Below are some wiki pages that should help with this:

Let me know if you think this would work for your needs. Additionally Tom will be in your area in the next week or so if you are available to meet face to face and discuss this and other potential options if needed.

Thanks,
Greg

    (1-2/2)