[meta-freescale] SOC_FAMILY Rework

[Otavio Salvador]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov <picmaster at mail.bg> wrote:
> On 07/09/2015 05:54 PM, Daiane Angolini wrote:
>>>
>>> It does not work. The point of OVERRIDE is to make changes in a set of
>>> SoCs and we cannot contaminate other BSP (Intel, TI, Samsung,
>>> Qualcomm...)
>>
>>
>> GPU is a SoC characteristic, and it's obvious it's the most important
>> BSP piece on i.MX6 family. Instead of having a tree like:
>>
>> imx -> imx6 -> everysingle soc
>>
>> We could have something like:
>>
>> imx -> imx6-light -> ligh socs
>> imx -> imx6-heavy -> heavy socs
>>
>> and, instead of list "everysingle soc" when setting GPU BSP, we can
>> list only "light and heavy".
>>
>> The downside is to list "light and heavy" in packages for imx6
>>
>>
>> I don't see how it will contaminate other BSP. I'm trying to stress
>> the imx OVERRIDE just included.
>
>
> This is an excellent example. The OVERRIDEs should generalize, not
> specialize (although you can always interpret a root-leaf traversal as
> a specialization :D). Detailed specialization will lead to OVERRIDEs
> tree explosion while trying to express every single SOC feature on each
> level of the tree.
>
> If we try to express SOC features via OVERRIDE mechanism, it's imho
> doomed.

That's why we use the family. mx53; mx6q; ...

-- 
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