[yocto] [meta-rockchip][PATCH 2/7] machine: Add machine file for the rk3288 linux Boards

[Eddie Cai]

Hi

2017-02-09 17:18 GMT+08:00 Jacob Chen <jacob2.chen at rock-chips.com>:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Eddie Cai wrote on 2017年02月09日 16:20:
>>
>> HI
>>
>> 2017-02-09 14:49 GMT+08:00 Jacob Chen <jacob2.chen at rock-chips.com>:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>>
>>> Trevor Woerner wrote on 2017年01月28日 03:41:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Romain Perier <romain.perier at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Could you:
>>> - Make one patch per new machine file and not one patch for all new added
>>> machine
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>> Are all of these machines actual devices? The evb one doesn't sound real.
>>>
>>> Are all of these machines released and available for purchase? I've
>>> heard of the tinkerboard (although I can't seem to find one I can
>>> actually buy) but I haven't heard of the fennec.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think i should only leave tinker board here.
>>> We have a lot of boards which are not open to the public,  it's not
>>> suitable
>>> to push them to the community.
>>>
>>> - Add a clear @DESCRIPTION for each board, see an example here:
>>>
>>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-rockchip/tree/conf/machine/firefly-rk3288.conf
>>> - Write a clear and an understandable commit message for your new patches
>>>
>>> @Trevor: What do you think about this rk-linux.inc ? I don't like this,
>>> either its name and what it contains.
>>>
>>> First off, I think it's really great to see people contributing to
>>> meta-rockchip! :-)
>>>
>>> This entire set of patches seems to be adding "official" support for
>>> the rockchip devices; in other words, these recipes will help you to
>>> create builds that use the official rockchip sources. That is great.
>>> But I think a good BSP gives a user all the possibilities but then
>>> leaves the final decision up to them.
>>>
>>>
>>> : ) That's the reason why we try to push patches to here, we want that
>>> "meta-rockchip" can
>>> build between vendor old kernel/new kernel/old u-boot/new u-boot and
>>> mainline kernel/u-boot
>>>   well.  Community people might help develop mainline things.
>>>
>>> So I agree with Romain, I think the name could use more work. It would
>>> be nice if this set of patches included something in the name that let
>>> the user know these build from official sources. Then the user could
>>> decide whether they want to use the official rockchip sources, or
>>> whether they want to build from upstream. So I'm not opposed to the
>>> idea of adding recipes for official sources, I'd like like to see them
>>> added in a way that leaves the decision with the user.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I added rk-linux.inc because i need a place to set up verndor-BSP default
>>> settings.
>>> I want that the user can choose various combinations by change the
>>> include
>>> file in machine file.
>>> e.g:
>>>      rk-linux.inc for linux-rockchip 4.4 + u-boot-rockchip-nex-dev
>>>      rk-linux.inc + rk-uboot.inc for linux-rockchip + u-boot-rockchip
>>>
>>>      rk-linux.inc for linux-mainline + u-boot-mainline
>
> I send the wrong draft due to the poor network... Please ignore the e.g...
>
> What i think it's that the users should always get image with  all features
> enabled  with default settings.
> I will be killed if i let them to set each settings one by one in local.conf
> to enable features....
> ok to change name and split file, but i think the things it contianed is
> needed.
>
>>> BTW, which name you think is better?
>>
>> What about follow raspberrypi?
>> ├── include
>> │   ├── rpi-base.inc
>> │   ├── rpi-default-providers.inc
>> │   ├── rpi-default-settings.inc
>> │   ├── rpi-default-versions.inc
>> │   └── tune-arm1176jzf-s.inc
>> ├── raspberrypi0.conf
>> ├── raspberrypi2.conf
>> ├── raspberrypi3.conf
>> └── raspberrypi.conf
>>
>
> split rk-linux.inc into
> rk-base.inc
> rk-vendor-providers.inc
> rk-vendor-settings.inc
> rk-vendor-versions.inc
> rk-community-providers.inc
> rk-community-settings.inc
> rk-community-versions.inc
Why we need a vendor version and a community version?
>
> ?
>
> Hmmm, it look more clearly than rk-linux.inc.
>
>
>>>
>>> That's it for now.
>>> Thanks for your patches
>>>
>>> +1 :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yocto mailing list
>>> yocto at yoctoproject.org
>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>>>
>