[meta-intel] [PATCHv2 4/5] meta-valleyisland: add kernel recipe for valleyisland

[Darren Hart]

On 3/24/14, 15:24, "Paul Eggleton" <paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com> wrote:

>On Monday 24 March 2014 15:16:56 Darren Hart wrote:
>> On 3/24/14, 15:11, "Paul Eggleton" <paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com>
>>wrote:
>> >On Monday 24 March 2014 15:07:10 Darren Hart wrote:
>> >> On 3/24/14, 10:57, "rebecca.swee.fun.chang at intel.com"
>> >> 
>> >> <rebecca.swee.fun.chang at intel.com> wrote:
>> >> >+#############################
>> >> >+# MACHINE = valleyisland-32 #
>> >> >+#############################
>> >> >+COMPATIBLE_MACHINE_valleyisland-32 = "valleyisland-32"
>> >> >+KMACHINE_valleyisland-32 = "valleyisland-32"
>> >> >+KBRANCH_valleyisland-32 = "standard/base"
>> >> >+KERNEL_FEATURES_valleyisland-32 =
>> >> >"features/valleyisland-io/valleyisland-io"
>> >> >+
>> >> >+LINUX_VERSION_valleyisland-32 = "3.10.32"
>> >> >+SRCREV_machine_pn-linux-yocto_valleyisland-32 ?=
>> >> >"61dde96f97bb5b1ed4c11caf9a857d55ad8f6e17"
>> >> >+SRCREV_meta_pn-linux-yocto_valleyisland-32 ?=
>> >> >"99c503a92885060bebf2bba6747735e8e9346a40"
>> >> 
>> >> With respect the need for pn-linux-yocto here, this is because all
>>the
>> >> other SRCREV_machine* in meta-intel are using = instead of ?=. This
>> >>
>> >>won't
>> >>
>> >> get set because the base linux-yocto recipe specifies a SRCREV, so
>>the
>> >>
>> >>?=
>> >>
>> >> will no override it. The pn-linux-yocto provides a more specific
>>value
>> >> which has not yet been set, so it sticks and gets applied.
>> >> 
>> >> Just for consistency, the right answer is probably to use = instead
>>of
>> >>
>> >>?=
>> >>
>> >> and drop the pn-linux-yocto.
>> >> 
>> >> I do not really care for have "=" in the bbappend honestly. I wonder
>>if
>> >> Paul would have another recommendation here...
>> >
>> >What concerns you about using = here? I would have thought it was OK in
>> >this
>> >situation; ?= is only really helpful where you want to apply a default
>> >where a
>> >value that should override the default may already have been set (e.g.
>>in
>> >local.conf where a desired value might have been set from the command
>> >line).
>> 
>> That is basically the concern, do we want people to be able to override
>>it
>> easily? Perhaps the answer is no. I suspect SRCREV's are really not
>> something we want people messing with. We can still override in
>>local.conf
>> using = right?
>
>We can if an additional override that is not present in the recipe/append
>is 
>used (e.g. pn-linux-yocto, assuming that is removed from the append as
>you 
>suggest). 
>
>If the recipe is setting it with = then that does make it a little harder
>to 
>override, but I think with something like SRCREV that is a good thing as
>you 
>say.
>
>Cheers,
>Paul

Thank you Paul,

Rebecca, can you verify that this can work without the pn-linux-yocto by
using "=" instead of "?=" ? We would prefer to remain consistent with BSPs
in meta-intel so the same override rules and procedures can be applied to
all the BSPs.

-- 
Darren Hart
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
Intel Open Source Technology Center