[yocto] [meta-raspberrypi][PATCH 1/3] raspberrypi2.conf: Make SERIAL_CONSOLE overwritable

[Mirza Krak]

2017-04-21 19:37 GMT+02:00 Paul Barker <pbarker at toganlabs.com>:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Andrei Gherzan <andrei at gherzan.ro> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 06:18:14PM +0100, Andrei Gherzan wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrei Gherzan <andrei at gherzan.ro>
>>> ---
>>>  conf/machine/raspberrypi2.conf | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/conf/machine/raspberrypi2.conf b/conf/machine/raspberrypi2.conf
>>> index 9b4c02a..a17289c 100644
>>> --- a/conf/machine/raspberrypi2.conf
>>> +++ b/conf/machine/raspberrypi2.conf
>>> @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ DEFAULTTUNE ?= "cortexa7thf-neon-vfpv4"
>>>  require conf/machine/include/tune-cortexa7.inc
>>>  include conf/machine/include/rpi-base.inc
>>>
>>> -SERIAL_CONSOLE = "115200 ttyAMA0"
>>> +SERIAL_CONSOLE ?= "115200 ttyAMA0"
>>>
>>>  UBOOT_MACHINE = "rpi_2_config"
>>>  VC4_CMA_SIZE ?= "cma-256"
>>> --
>>> 2.12.2
>>>
>>
>> Entire patch set merged to master and morty.
>>
>
> This is the sort of thing I'm not keen on applying to stable branches
> as it may change recipe behaviour. For comparison, the stable branch
> policy for oe-core is very strict
> (https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Stable_branch_maintenance#Policies).
>
> In my mind, avoiding potential breakage on a stable branch is more
> important than making improvements. I'm even weary of updating the
> raspberrypi firmware as I don't know how careful they are about
> backwards compatibility. For kernel updates I do have an expectation
> of backwards compatibility and an understanding that new stable
> releases often fix security issues so I'm ok with those on stable
> branches.
>
> For example of where I'm concerned, a "raspberrypi2" override was
> previously applied to both raspberrypi2 and raspberrypi3 machines.
> After the third patch in this series it only applies to the
> raspberrypi2 machine. Also, UBOOT_MACHINE is now set differently for
> raspberrypi3 ('=' vs '?='). These changes may affect the value of some
> variables when building for raspberrypi3 if downstream users haven't
> explicitly handled both raspberrypi2 and raspberrypi3 overrides. I
> don't mind these sorts of changes on the master branch but I worry
> about applying them to a stable branch.
>
> What do other meta-raspberrypi stable branch users think? Should we be
> pedantic here or should we keep things open so that improvements can
> be applied to stable branches?

I would have to agree with Paul here since you asked :).

I would apply a more strict policy working with stable branches, and
be be more in line with the Yocto policy. That is only bug fixes,
security updates and make sure that build is stable on supported
distributions. Everything else can wait until the next "release" and
reside in master.

My 2 cents.

Best Regards
Mirza