[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc][PATCH 5/5] cryptodev: update to 1.7 plus FSL patches

[Liu Ting]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Otavio Salvador [mailto:otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br]
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2015 10:50 PM
> To: Liu Ting-B28495
> Cc: Otavio Salvador; meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc][PATCH 5/5] cryptodev: update to
> 1.7 plus FSL patches
> 
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Liu Ting <ting.liu at freescale.com> wrote:
> ...
> >> The commit itself is fine but I would wonder if the duplication of
> >> the recipe is the right way to solve this.
> > [Liu Ting-B28495] yes, I know your concern. The best way is to upstream all
> the FSL patches. But the developer said the process is not under control,
> especially when we need to meet the SDK release cycle. The build may break too
> when using bbappends if there is update in poky.
> > Anyway, I can format a new patch if bbappend preferred.
> 
> The bbappend has following advantages:
[Liu Ting-B28495] yes, we know these, also the disadvantages:) they are the two sides of the coin.

> 
>  - if a patch is included in the recipe, it is inherited automatically
>  - if a fix is done in the recipe it is likely to be inherited
[Liu Ting-B28495] yes, patches from upstream will be lost.

>  - if a version change is done, build breaks and we know we need to upgrade
[Liu Ting-B28495] in this case, bbappend will then be replaced with old bb files, as we tested this version :)
It is important to keep cryptodev/openssl stable and qualified for qoriq.

> 
> That's why I prefer it. But it is not my call ;-)
> 
> --
> 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