[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm-extra][PATCH 1/2] linux-riotboard: Add separate riotboard kernel recipe

[Otavio Salvador]

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov <picmaster at mail.bg> wrote:
> On 04/27/2015 02:40 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>
>> Hello Nikolay,
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Nikolay Dimitrov <picmaster at mail.bg>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Add dedicated RIoTboard kernel recipe for easier maintenance and patch
>>> cherry-picking.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Dimitrov <picmaster at mail.bg>
>>
>>
>> I want to check with you if you really want to have a dedicated
>> recipe. For bugfixes (as now) you can use a bbappend as a temporary
>> solution and, at end of the day, easy to remove once this is fixed in
>> the kernel.
>>
>> Please let me know your thoughts...
>
>
> Do you mean something like this (bbappend in meta-fsl-arm-extra)?
>
> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc_4.0.bbappend
> b/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc_4.0.bbappend
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..d7a4e72
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc_4.0.bbappend
> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
> +FILESEXTRAPATHS_append := ":${THISDIR}/${PN}"
> +
> +SRC_URI_imx6dl-riotboard = "file://riotboard-specific.patch"

Yes.

> Well, imho the difference between bbappending and having a separate
> recipe is that the bbappending mechanism is retro-reactive - I can
> bbappend patches to linux-fslc but in the meantime the board support
> will be broken.
>
> Maintaining a separate kernel recipe for riotboard is a proactive way,
> imho. When linux-fslc updates are happening, they won't immediately
> break the riotboard, and after I test the updates I can update SRC_REV
> to point it to a specific working commit, or as in my case point
> SRC_REV to the latest commit and revert just one specific patch. The
> advantage is that all the time the board support will be working.
>
> This was my motivation for the patch. Please tell me if there are any
> drawback of having a separate board kernel recipe.

Maintenance burden.

Your thought is right but what should have been done was people to
report this issue when we included 4.0 recipe.

For now a bbappend would work as a band-aid while the real fix is
being cooked.  I usually do not do design for the exception and I
believe linux-fslc once fixed will be kept working for the board.

This is really up to you but I think a boot test every time we prepare
a bump linux-fslc would be enough to iron out the need of a specific
recipe.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750