Hello everyone,

The CE workgroup of the Linux Foundation would like to invite you
to make a presentation at our upcoming Embedded Linux Conference.
The conference will be held April 29 - May 1 in San Jose,
California.

For general information about the conference, See
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/embedded-linux-conference/

For information about the call for participation, see
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/embedded-linux-conference/cfp

Please note the guidelines on the CFP page. It's usually pretty obvious
when we're reviewing the abstracts, as a program committee, who has
read the guidelines and who hasn't. :-)

ELC is the premier vendor-neutral technical conference for
embedded Linux developers. The conference is open to the public.

= Guidelines =
Presentations should be of a technical nature, covering topics
related to use of Linux in embedded systems. Topics related to
consumer electronics are particularly encouraged, but any
proposals about Linux that are of general relevance to most
embedded developers are welcome.

Presentations that are commercial advertisements or sales
pitches are not appropriate for this conference.

Presentations on the following topics are encouraged:

* Audio, Video, and Graphics systems for embedded products
* Security
* System size
* Bootup time
* Meeting real-time constraints
* Power management
* Streaming media
* Flash memory devices and filesystems
* Build systems
* Embedded distributions
* Development tools for embedded users
* Porting and CPU customizations
* Technologies related to cell phones, digital settop boxes,
televisions, cameras, handheld devices, or other CE products
* Use of Linux in actual products, practical experience and
war stories
* Standards for CE products

Most presentation slots will be 50 minutes long, including time for
questions.

Tutorials, demos, and Birds-of-a-Feather sessions may also be
proposed.

The deadline for submissions is midnight February 1, 2014 PDT.

See http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/embedded-linux-conference/cfp
for additional information and details for making a proposal.

Thanks,
-- Tim

Done! Feel free to review and suggest any further improvement.

Thanks a lot for providing all this information,

Thanks for getting this on the wiki.
-- Tim

On 30 December 2013 15:13, Bird, Tim <Tim.Bird@...> wrote:

On Monday, December 30, 2013 9:56 AM, Ezequiel García [ezequiel@...] wrote:

If the "status" tag looks good, then let's keep it for projects that
are not selected
for sponsor and add the details about it at the bottom. Something like this?

http://elinux.org/Improve_UBI_user_space_tools

The status tag is good, but please add the year the item was not selected.
We had a project that was rejected 2 years ago, but selected this year.
Also, please put the 'non-selected' notes section in a sub-heading under
'Notes'. I've changed the Improve_UBI_user_space_tools page as
an example.

Can you please follow those for the other non-selected items?

Done! Feel free to review and suggest any further improvement.

Thanks a lot for providing all this information,
--
Ezequiel García, VanguardiaSur
www.vanguardiasur.com.ar

On Monday, December 30, 2013 9:56 AM, Ezequiel García [ezequiel@...] wrote:

If the "status" tag looks good, then let's keep it for projects that
are not selected
for sponsor and add the details about it at the bottom. Something like this?

http://elinux.org/Improve_UBI_user_space_tools

The status tag is good, but please add the year the item was not selected.
We had a project that was rejected 2 years ago, but selected this year.
Also, please put the 'non-selected' notes section in a sub-heading under
'Notes'. I've changed the Improve_UBI_user_space_tools page as
an example.

Can you please follow those for the other non-selected items?

Thanks
-- Tim

On 30 December 2013 14:41, Bird, Tim <Tim.Bird@...> wrote:

On Friday, December 27, 2013 4:27 PM, Ezequiel García wrote:

On 10 December 2013 19:05, Bird, Tim <Tim.Bird@...> wrote:
[..]

Here is the list of projects that the CE working group decided to fund:

1. Setup LTSI testing/validation infrastructure
2. CPU Shielding capability
3. Device-tree documentation
4. Overwrite detection for kernel text and read-only data
5. Android boot time improvements
6. Compressed printk messages
7. Add support for CONFIG_NUMA to ARM
8. More robust UBIFS support

Added a small "Status" entry, marking the above as selected projects.

You can see details about these project by following the links at:
http://elinux.org/CEWG_Open_Project_Proposal_2013#Selected_Projects

And added a link to the selected projects list, to the complete project list:

http://elinux.org/Project_Proposals_for_2013

This looks good. Thanks. I thought you were also planning on adding the
notes to other projects about why they weren't selected. Do you still plan
to do this, or was I mistaken?

Yes that was the plan, you weren't mistaken.

If the "status" tag looks good, then let's keep it for projects that
are not selected
for sponsor and add the details about it at the bottom. Something like this?

http://elinux.org/Improve_UBI_user_space_tools

Again, sorry for the delay...
--
Ezequiel García, VanguardiaSur
www.vanguardiasur.com.ar

On Friday, December 27, 2013 4:27 PM, Ezequiel García wrote:

On 10 December 2013 19:05, Bird, Tim <Tim.Bird@...> wrote:
[..]

Here is the list of projects that the CE working group decided to fund:

1. Setup LTSI testing/validation infrastructure
2. CPU Shielding capability
3. Device-tree documentation
4. Overwrite detection for kernel text and read-only data
5. Android boot time improvements
6. Compressed printk messages
7. Add support for CONFIG_NUMA to ARM
8. More robust UBIFS support

Added a small "Status" entry, marking the above as selected projects.

You can see details about these project by following the links at:
http://elinux.org/CEWG_Open_Project_Proposal_2013#Selected_Projects

And added a link to the selected projects list, to the complete project list:

http://elinux.org/Project_Proposals_for_2013

This looks good. Thanks. I thought you were also planning on adding the
notes to other projects about why they weren't selected. Do you still plan
to do this, or was I mistaken?
-- Tim

On 10 December 2013 19:05, Bird, Tim <Tim.Bird@...> wrote:
[..]

Here is the list of projects that the CE working group decided to fund:

1. Setup LTSI testing/validation infrastructure
2. CPU Shielding capability
3. Device-tree documentation
4. Overwrite detection for kernel text and read-only data
5. Android boot time improvements
6. Compressed printk messages
7. Add support for CONFIG_NUMA to ARM
8. More robust UBIFS support

Added a small "Status" entry, marking the above as selected projects.

You can see details about these project by following the links at:
http://elinux.org/CEWG_Open_Project_Proposal_2013#Selected_Projects

And added a link to the selected projects list, to the complete project list:

http://elinux.org/Project_Proposals_for_2013

Feel free to modify or correct the modifications.

Sorry for the delay and regards!
--
Ezequiel García, VanguardiaSur
www.vanguardiasur.com.ar

I am pleased to announce the projects to be sponsored by the CE Workgroup
for the next year. In September, the CEWG had an open project proposal
period, where we solicited project ideas from the community and from workgroup
members. In October, at our Architecture Group meeting, we did a technical
review of these proposals, and recently the Steering Committee
voted on the projects to sponsor in the coming year.

Here is the list of projects that the CE working group decided to fund:

1. Setup LTSI testing/validation infrastructure
2. CPU Shielding capability
3. Device-tree documentation
4. Overwrite detection for kernel text and read-only data
5. Android boot time improvements
6. Compressed printk messages
7. Add support for CONFIG_NUMA to ARM
8. More robust UBIFS support

You can see details about these project by following the links at:
http://elinux.org/CEWG_Open_Project_Proposal_2013#Selected_Projects

The CE Workgroup decided not to fund the following other projects.

Improve UBI user space tools
Implement scatter-gather lists support in UBI and UBIFS
Support dumping user-space stack from kernel
Kernel module binary compatibility with debug features
Improve devm_* and get rid of boilerplate code
Mainline synaptics touchscreen driver
Add device-tree support to pn544 NFC driver
Fix IRQ Domain DT support issues and gpio IRQ
Generic upgrade infrastructure for embedded systems
Support asymetric RSA in Crypto API

Proposers and others have expressed interest in learning
about the reasons why some of these were not selected.

Here are some very brief notes about the reasons for not
supporting a particular project:

==
Improve UBI user space tools
Implement scatter-gather lists support in UBI and UBIFS

Most CE companies are moving away from raw NAND towards eMMC for
CE products. So UBIFS-related projects were not favored. One
UBIFS project, dealing with robustness, however, was selected.

Also, we had no bids for these projects. In the case of
the scatter-gather list proposal, the main feature seemed to
be to reduce memory utilization of UBIFS. No member companies
seemed to have that problem. There was no indication whether
scatter-gather lists might affect performance (it should improve
with less data copies, but there was no data indicating any change).

Support dumping user-space stack from kernel

Most members thought LTTng already supported this sufficiently.
If done from kernel, this would require user-space symbols in
the kernel, which seemed difficult in memory-constrained devices.
Also, no bid was received for this project.

Kernel module binary compatibility with debug features

There was concern that upstream kernel developers would break
any compatibility later that was created, over time. Also,
there was concern over who would maintain the support for this.
Finally, there were technical issues with how to collapse and
expand structures based on debug features.

Improve devm_* and get rid of boilerplate code

This appeared to be useful, and Wolfram produced good results
in the past. However, there just wasn't enough interest in
the project by the different member companies.

Mainline synaptics touchscreen driver

Not enough AG members used this driver to be interested in
collaborating on the funding of it. The Synaptics RMI4 driver
is already in the driver/input tree, just not pushed to Linus.
Synaptics is planning to do another push of this, so CEWG decided
to wait and see the outcome of that work.

Add device-tree support to pn544 NFC driver

Not enough AG members used this chip to be interested in collaborating
on the funding of it. (At least, of those attending the meeting).
The upstream driver is not compatible with Android, and the out-of-tree
driver is not difficult to maintain, with most of the functionality
residing in the user-space library. It was decided there was not
enough return on investment to justify funding this work.

Fix IRQ Domain DT support issues and gpio IRQ

This proposal was submitted very late (well past the deadline), and
there was no time to analyze it, solicit member feedback, or get bids.

Generic upgrade infrastructure for embedded systems

Most AG members thought that companies already had existing upgrade
solutions (e.g. Android already has well-established upgrade mechanisms)
Also, most members didn't think a one-size-fits-all approach would be
useful. The proposal seems to be based on a particular file system
layout, and doesn't handle special use cases like read-only partitions.

Support asymetric RSA in Crypto API

This project seemed useful, and many companies were interested.
However, the only bid received was from a company that looked likely
to already receive some projects this round (and they might not
have the bandwidth to work on this and others.) This was rated lower
priority than other projects bid upon by the same contractor.

On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:58 PM, Ezequiel García [ezequiel@...] wrote:

On 22 November 2013 17:02, Bird, Tim <Tim.Bird@...> wrote:

Sorry for the slow response. I had hoped to be able to
announce the results of the voting actually during the week
of ELC Europe (back in October). However, there were
some delays and the final vote hasn't yet completed.

[..]

Of the UBIFS-related proposals, only the robustness testing/fixes
proposal is still being considered for sponsorship.

Thanks for this information.

When the voting is complete, which should be by the end of the month,
I'll try to find some time to provide more detail about individual proposals
and why they were accepted or rejected.

Thanks, that would be great!
Maybe you can write a short status mail to this list, and I can take
care of adding such information to each proposal's page on elinux's wiki.

Ezequiel,

That would be great. I have prepared some information that I will be posting
to the list shortly. If you could add the information to each proposal's page
I think it could be useful for future submissions.
-- Tim

Hi,

The next Japan Jamboree is scheduled on the next Wednesday, 11th.


Best,
S. Ueda

----- Japanese -----
各位、

次回の日本テクニカルジャンボリーは、

　12月 11日（水）　午前10時～　中野サンプラザ

にて開催します。丁度来週の今日です。詳細は下記を参照願います。

http://elinux.org/Japan_Technical_Jamboree_47

■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
是非ともEmbedded Linux Conference Europeに参加されたかたからのお土産話を期待
しています！これらのイベントで発表された方、参加された方など、奮って参加願います。
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

併せて皆さんからの発表の申し込みをお待ちしています。

なお、このイベントは、どなたでも、無料で参加可能です。また、発表もなるべく多くの
方にして頂けるように配慮しております。


上田


--
| TEL: +81-(0)50-3750-3882 FAX: +81-(0)50-3750-6620
| Strategic Alliance Sec.
| S&T Technology Promotion Dept, Software Design Group, Sony Corp.

Hello Tim,


On 22 November 2013 17:02, Bird, Tim <Tim.Bird@...> wrote:

============= start of quoted message ================
On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 2:42 PM, Ezequiel García wrote:

I'd like to know what ever happened to the "Boot U-Boot from UBI
volume" proposal,
as it seemed a very interesting project.

Currently I'm working in a product with a _very_ long-life, yet based
in NAND flash,
and so I would have considered the ability to have the bootloader in a
bad block aware
device very appealing.

... and in the same vein, I would really appreciate to have some
status information about each
proposed project. Something that tells us if it was rejected (and
maybe some useful reasons
for rejection as feedback?) and/or accepted.

On the other side, maybe this is too much to ask? ;-)

Sorry for the slow response. I had hoped to be able to
announce the results of the voting actually during the week
of ELC Europe (back in October). However, there were
some delays and the final vote hasn't yet completed.

[..]

Of the UBIFS-related proposals, only the robustness testing/fixes
proposal is still being considered for sponsorship.

Thanks for this information.

When the voting is complete, which should be by the end of the month,
I'll try to find some time to provide more detail about individual proposals
and why they were accepted or rejected.

Thanks, that would be great!
Maybe you can write a short status mail to this list, and I can take
care of adding such information to each proposal's page on elinux's wiki.

--
Ezequiel García, VanguardiaSur
www.vanguardiasur.com.ar

Hi,

The next Japan Jamboree is scheduled just 2 weeks later.


Best,
S. Ueda

----- Japanese -----
各位、

次回の日本テクニカルジャンボリーは、

　12月 11日（水）　午前10時～　中野サンプラザ

にて開催します。丁度２週間後です。詳細は下記を参照願います。

http://elinux.org/Japan_Technical_Jamboree_47

■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
是非ともEmbedded Linux Conference Europeに参加されたかたからのお土産話を期待
しています！これらのイベントで発表された方、参加された方など、奮って参加願います。
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

併せて皆さんからの発表の申し込みをお待ちしています。

なお、このイベントは、どなたでも、無料で参加可能です。また、発表もなるべく多くの
方にして頂けるように配慮しております。


上田

(2013/11/20 9:45), Satoru Ueda wrote:

--
| TEL: +81-(0)50-3750-3882 FAX: +81-(0)50-3750-6620
| Strategic Alliance Sec.
| S&T Technology Promotion Dept, Software Design Group, Sony Corp.

Dear Tim,

In message <F5184659D418E34EA12B1903EE5EF5FDB2141337C3@...> you wrote:

This will not be comprehensive, because I don't have time today
to talk about all the proposals. But in general, the UBIFS proposals
were not rated highly by the Architecture Group. The main reason
for this was that a lot of companies (at least companies with a vote
in the CE WG Architecture Group) appear to be moving
away from using raw NAND. Hence, UBIFS is less strategic to
develop for in the long run. Note that this only reflects the interests
of "consumer electronics" requirements, and (maybe) not the trends
in the general embedded Linux industry in general.

I agree with this assessment. The typical requirements (like product
life time, perfective maintenance etc.) for consumer electronics
products is very much different from the requirements from embedded
systems for example in the automation industry, where product
lifetimes are often more than an order higher than for typical
consumer electronics" devices. This obviously results in differing
priorities. It's perfectly reasonable (but still a pity) that the
members of the Consumer Electronics Linux Forum support their own
needs first.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@...
"Tell the truth and run." - Yugoslav proverb

============= start of quoted message ================
On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 2:42 PM, Ezequiel García wrote:

I'd like to know what ever happened to the "Boot U-Boot from UBI
volume" proposal,
as it seemed a very interesting project.

Currently I'm working in a product with a _very_ long-life, yet based
in NAND flash,
and so I would have considered the ability to have the bootloader in a
bad block aware
device very appealing.

... and in the same vein, I would really appreciate to have some
status information about each
proposed project. Something that tells us if it was rejected (and
maybe some useful reasons
for rejection as feedback?) and/or accepted.

On the other side, maybe this is too much to ask? ;-)

Sorry for the slow response. I had hoped to be able to
announce the results of the voting actually during the week
of ELC Europe (back in October). However, there were
some delays and the final vote hasn't yet completed.

We usually do a pretty poor job of announcing the results
of our evaluation. This time is no different. While I can't
announce yet which projects were selected (because the
CE workgroup voting is not finalized yet), I can at least shed
a little light on a few that are out of the running.

This will not be comprehensive, because I don't have time today
to talk about all the proposals. But in general, the UBIFS proposals
were not rated highly by the Architecture Group. The main reason
for this was that a lot of companies (at least companies with a vote
in the CE WG Architecture Group) appear to be moving
away from using raw NAND. Hence, UBIFS is less strategic to
develop for in the long run. Note that this only reflects the interests
of "consumer electronics" requirements, and (maybe) not the trends
in the general embedded Linux industry in general.

Of the UBIFS-related proposals, only the robustness testing/fixes
proposal is still being considered for sponsorship.

When the voting is complete, which should be by the end of the month,
I'll try to find some time to provide more detail about individual proposals
and why they were accepted or rejected.
-- Tim

There isn't a need for interrupt-lines work anymore. Support has been
merged for a similar property called interrupts-extended. However, the
gpio-as-irq problem still exists and needs to be resolved.

g.

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
<plagnioj@...> wrote:

HI Tim,

is this ok for this time

Best Regards,
J.
On 07:07 Tue 22 Oct , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

HI,

== Description ==
Fix IRQ Domain DT support issues and gpio IRQ

Today the kernel have multiple issues arround the IRQ

* IRQ Domain platfrom driver support

Today if you register an irq domain via a platform driver and then use the irq
in DT such as this

eth0: ethernet at 30000000 {
compatible = "micrel,ks8851-mll";
reg = <0x30000000 0x1
0x30000002 0xff>;
interrupt-parent = <&pioD>;
interrupts = <21 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH>;
pinctrl-names = "default";
pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_board_eth0>;
status = "okay";
};

the irq in the platform resource will not be fill as the resolve is done at of_platform_populate
To fix this we need to resolve the irq at driver probe time.

* Multiple interrupt-parent support

Today if you need the irq from 2 interrupt controler it's impossible.
Such as a hw irq and a GPIO irq both provided via dt

To fix this implement a new property "interrupt-lines"

that will work in a same way as gpios by providing firt the phandle of the controller
and then the cell data

interrupt-lines = <&aic 0 4 0 & pioD 21 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH>;

* gpio irq DT

Today you need to use a gpio as IRQ you need to configure it and then use it
As a in the kernel we make the disctinction between standard IRQ and gpio IRQ.
This should have never been the case and need to be fix up widely.
By droping all the gpio_to_irq in the drivers and ONLY provide interrupts

== Related work ==
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.devicetree/36679


== Scope ==

I think this will take about 3 to 5 month depending on the discussion on the
kernel mainling list with an effort of about 240 to 300 hours.

== Contractor Candidates ==

Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com>
== Comments ==

By Linus Walleij

Actually I have that problem today. An MMC card slot
with two IRQs for the traffic and another totally different
IRQ for the card insertion IRQ, sitting on a different controller,
and this one is not even a GPIO, so I cannot cheat and have
it as a GPIO that I then translate into an IRQ.

Overall Jean-Christophe's proposal is correctly pinpointing
some serious unhandled corner cases we have in DT land.


Best Regards,
J.

Tim,

On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 18:06:11 +0100, Bird, Tim wrote:

If you submitted your slides using the CFP interface, they should have
been picked up by the LF staff automatically, and put on the LF web site
for ELCE. I tried to send mine by e-mail, but was told to use the CFP site
instead. If yours are not showing up, I'd send an e-mail to Craig Ross, and
have him check on the situation.

After checking, must have been a mistake on my side. I went again on
the CFP site, re-uploaded my slides, and it just worked. So maybe the
previous time I selected the file, then clicked "Save", while I should
have clicked "Upload".

So, nevermind, it was a user issue. My slides are now visible at
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/embedded-linux-conference-europe.

Sorry for the noise,

Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

On Thursday, November 21, 2013 12:19 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:

Do you know what should be done to make the slides of a given
conference appear on the events.linuxfoundation.org page? I've uploaded
my slides on elinux.org and they appear here. I've also uploaded them
in the "CfP" interface of events.linuxfoundation.org, as I was under
the assumption that the slides showing up on the LF website came from
this, but it doesn't seem to be the case. Anyone knows what's the
trick? :-)

If you submitted your slides using the CFP interface, they should have
been picked up by the LF staff automatically, and put on the LF web site
for ELCE. I tried to send mine by e-mail, but was told to use the CFP site
instead. If yours are not showing up, I'd send an e-mail to Craig Ross, and
have him check on the situation.
-- Tim

Dear Ezequiel,

In message <CAAEAJfCY4__aqzT-iyCBSGeUDn36Jn7MY+KPFECv=YdYZ5U9Wg@...> you wrote:

I'd like to know what ever happened to the "Boot U-Boot from UBI
volume" proposal,
as it seemed a very interesting project.

Since the proposal was made, U-Boot has developed a lot; especially the
SPL framework is now a well-supported standard feature. This will
make it easier to implement the proposed features, but to the best of
my knowledgt this has still not been done yet.

Currently I'm working in a product with a _very_ long-life, yet based
in NAND flash,
and so I would have considered the ability to have the bootloader in a
bad block aware
device very appealing.

I think many users are not really aware of the specific properties of
NAND flashbased memory, or they push aside such concerns. In most
cases (like short-living or little-used consumer devices) this works
fine, resp. other errors pop up so much more frequently that this
problem receives no real attention.

Please feel free to contact me if you are interested in deeper
details.

... and in the same vein, I would really appreciate to have some
status information about each
proposed project. Something that tells us if it was rejected (and
maybe some useful reasons
for rejection as feedback?) and/or accepted.

Indeed that would be interesting information.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@...
Quote from the Boss after overriding the decision of a task force he
created to find a solution: "I'm sorry if I ever gave you the
impression your input would have any effect on my decision for the
outcome of this project!"

Dear Bird, Tim,

On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:54:42 +0100, Bird, Tim wrote:

Many slide decks and some videos from ELC Europe are now available.

Thanks for this announcement!

The slides and videos on LF's web site are published here:
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/embedded-linux-conference-europe
under the heading "Event Recap".

[...]

If you were a speaker at ELCE and haven't posted or sent your slides, please
do so as soon as possible.

Do you know what should be done to make the slides of a given
conference appear on the events.linuxfoundation.org page? I've uploaded
my slides on elinux.org and they appear here. I've also uploaded them
in the "CfP" interface of events.linuxfoundation.org, as I was under
the assumption that the slides showing up on the LF website came from
this, but it doesn't seem to be the case. Anyone knows what's the
trick? :-)

Thanks!

Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

HI Tim,

is this ok for this time

Best Regards,
J.