[meta-intel] [PATCH 0/4] AMT feature re-enabling commits

[Kamble, Nitin A]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 8:26 AM
> To: Zanussi, Tom
> Cc: Kamble, Nitin A; meta-intel at yoctoproject.org; Hart, Darren
> Subject: Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 0/4] AMT feature re-enabling commits
> 
> On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 10:21 -0500, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 10:06 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote:
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Zanussi, Tom
> > > > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2013 5:07 PM
> > > > To: Kamble, Nitin A
> > > > Cc: Hart, Darren; meta-intel at yoctoproject.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] AMT feature re-enabling commits
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 18:29 +0000, nitin.a.kamble at intel.com wrote:
> > > > > From: Nitin A Kamble <nitin.a.kamble at intel.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Here are few commits to re-enable AMT/MEI feature in the
> > > > > meta-intel
> > > > layer.
> > > > >
> > > > > The previous lms recipe is replaced by lms7 & lms8 recipes to
> > > > > cover boards with AMT v7 and also AMT v8 firmware.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, I was away at a conference and haven't been able to get to
> > > > these yet, but one question I had was why you're creating two new
> > > > recipes withe versions in the name rather than just using the
> > > > normal PV for specifying versions?
> > >
> > > Tom,
> > >    There are 2 major versions, viz 7 & 8 of AMT/lms. And there is also
> further subversion.
> > > The AMT firmware on boards today is either major version 7 or 8. And
> > > BSPs can specify which major version it needs. If the subversion of
> > > the lms recipe changes in future, then BSP need not change to pick
> > > up the newer version lms recipe. They automatically will get the
> > > latest subversion of the lms recipe with the desired major version.
> > > If not done this way, then full version need to be mentioned in the BSP
> configuration. And that will change every time the lms recipe version is
> changed.
> > >
> >
> > Couldn't we do something like what we do with the kernel e.g.
> >
> > PREFERRED_VERSION_lms ?= "7%"
It is doable, I think like kernel recipe it will need additional logic to make it work properly.
Need to check is it worth the effort here.

> 
> Its conceivable that the user would need both versions, one for some boards
> and one for the other so name spacing the versions here in PN does sound
> like the right thing to do...

Thanks RP for throwing light on this usage case. Putting both versions in an image
was not part of my design. I may need to do some changes to the recipes for this
runtime coexistence.

Thanks,
Nitin

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
>