* [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default @ 2020-04-12 5:45 Khem Raj 2020-04-13 22:05 ` Jon Mason 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Khem Raj @ 2020-04-12 5:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jon.mason, meta-arm; +Cc: Khem Raj all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm machines too this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP environments, platforms which support optee should be specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, for general case it remains 'null' Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> --- meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb | 2 ++ meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb | 2 ++ meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb | 1 + meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb | 1 + meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc | 2 ++ 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+) create mode 100644 meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb index a25d343..bae7b20 100644 --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE;md5=69663ab153298557a59c67a60a743e5b" PV = "3.8.0+git${SRCPV}" +require optee.inc + inherit python3native systemd SRCREV = "be4fa2e36f717f03ca46e574aa66f697a897d090" diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb index 768a55b..996e2cd 100644 --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ DEPENDS = "optee-client optee-os python3-pycryptodomex-native" inherit python3native +require optee.inc + SRC_URI = "git://github.com/linaro-swg/optee_examples.git" SRCREV = "559b2141c16bf0f57ccd72f60e4deb84fc2a05b0" diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb index 47ced12..5c420b7 100644 --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE;md5=c1f21c4f72f372ef38a5a4aee55ec173" PV = "3.8.0+git${SRCPV}" inherit deploy python3native +require optee.inc DEPENDS = "python3-pycrypto-native python3-pyelftools-native python3-pycryptodomex-native" diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb index 752d75d..ee73a2c 100644 --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ LICENSE = "BSD & GPLv2" LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE.md;md5=daa2bcccc666345ab8940aab1315a4fa" inherit python3native +require optee.inc DEPENDS = "optee-client optee-os python3-pycryptodomex-native" diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a12521d --- /dev/null +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" +# Please add supported machines below -- 2.26.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default 2020-04-12 5:45 [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default Khem Raj @ 2020-04-13 22:05 ` Jon Mason 2020-04-13 22:06 ` Denys Dmytriyenko [not found] ` <16058061C39D13E2.17445@lists.yoctoproject.org> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Jon Mason @ 2020-04-13 22:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: meta-arm; +Cc: Khem Raj On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:45:31PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm machines too > this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP environments, platforms which > support optee should be specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, > for general case it remains 'null' Pulled into the master branch. Thanks, Jon > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > --- > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb | 2 ++ > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb | 2 ++ > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb | 1 + > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb | 1 + > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc | 2 ++ > 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb > index a25d343..bae7b20 100644 > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb > @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE;md5=69663ab153298557a59c67a60a743e5b" > > PV = "3.8.0+git${SRCPV}" > > +require optee.inc > + > inherit python3native systemd > > SRCREV = "be4fa2e36f717f03ca46e574aa66f697a897d090" > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb > index 768a55b..996e2cd 100644 > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb > @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ DEPENDS = "optee-client optee-os python3-pycryptodomex-native" > > inherit python3native > > +require optee.inc > + > SRC_URI = "git://github.com/linaro-swg/optee_examples.git" > SRCREV = "559b2141c16bf0f57ccd72f60e4deb84fc2a05b0" > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb > index 47ced12..5c420b7 100644 > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE;md5=c1f21c4f72f372ef38a5a4aee55ec173" > PV = "3.8.0+git${SRCPV}" > > inherit deploy python3native > +require optee.inc > > DEPENDS = "python3-pycrypto-native python3-pyelftools-native python3-pycryptodomex-native" > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb > index 752d75d..ee73a2c 100644 > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ LICENSE = "BSD & GPLv2" > LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE.md;md5=daa2bcccc666345ab8940aab1315a4fa" > > inherit python3native > +require optee.inc > > DEPENDS = "optee-client optee-os python3-pycryptodomex-native" > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..a12521d > --- /dev/null > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" > +# Please add supported machines below > -- > 2.26.0 > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default 2020-04-13 22:05 ` Jon Mason @ 2020-04-13 22:06 ` Denys Dmytriyenko [not found] ` <16058061C39D13E2.17445@lists.yoctoproject.org> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2020-04-13 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: meta-arm; +Cc: Khem Raj On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:05:19PM -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:45:31PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm machines too > > this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP environments, platforms which > > support optee should be specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, > > for general case it remains 'null' > > Pulled into the master branch. I think this was due to the parsing issues, resolved by another patch. What's the point of masking this recipes now? > Thanks, > Jon > > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > --- > > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb | 2 ++ > > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb | 2 ++ > > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb | 1 + > > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb | 1 + > > meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc | 2 ++ > > 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb > > index a25d343..bae7b20 100644 > > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-client_git.bb > > @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE;md5=69663ab153298557a59c67a60a743e5b" > > > > PV = "3.8.0+git${SRCPV}" > > > > +require optee.inc > > + > > inherit python3native systemd > > > > SRCREV = "be4fa2e36f717f03ca46e574aa66f697a897d090" > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb > > index 768a55b..996e2cd 100644 > > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-examples_git.bb > > @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ DEPENDS = "optee-client optee-os python3-pycryptodomex-native" > > > > inherit python3native > > > > +require optee.inc > > + > > SRC_URI = "git://github.com/linaro-swg/optee_examples.git" > > SRCREV = "559b2141c16bf0f57ccd72f60e4deb84fc2a05b0" > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb > > index 47ced12..5c420b7 100644 > > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bb > > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE;md5=c1f21c4f72f372ef38a5a4aee55ec173" > > PV = "3.8.0+git${SRCPV}" > > > > inherit deploy python3native > > +require optee.inc > > > > DEPENDS = "python3-pycrypto-native python3-pyelftools-native python3-pycryptodomex-native" > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb > > index 752d75d..ee73a2c 100644 > > --- a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee-test_git.bb > > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ LICENSE = "BSD & GPLv2" > > LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/LICENSE.md;md5=daa2bcccc666345ab8940aab1315a4fa" > > > > inherit python3native > > +require optee.inc > > > > DEPENDS = "optee-client optee-os python3-pycryptodomex-native" > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000..a12521d > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" > > +# Please add supported machines below > > -- > > 2.26.0 > > > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <16058061C39D13E2.17445@lists.yoctoproject.org>]
* Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default [not found] ` <16058061C39D13E2.17445@lists.yoctoproject.org> @ 2020-04-13 22:40 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2020-04-13 23:55 ` Khem Raj 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2020-04-13 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: meta-arm; +Cc: Khem Raj On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:06:37PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:05:19PM -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:45:31PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm machines too > > > this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP environments, platforms which > > > support optee should be specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, > > > for general case it remains 'null' > > > > Pulled into the master branch. > > I think this was due to the parsing issues, resolved by another patch. What's > the point of masking this recipes now? > > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..a12521d > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > > > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" > > > +# Please add supported machines below Can we instead of neutering all OPTEE recipes and requiring BSPs to provide bbappends with COMPATIBLE_MACHINE for opt-in, add EXCLUDE_FROM_WORLD = "1"? -- Denys ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default 2020-04-13 22:40 ` Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2020-04-13 23:55 ` Khem Raj 2020-04-14 0:48 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Khem Raj @ 2020-04-13 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Denys Dmytriyenko; +Cc: meta-arm On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 3:40 PM Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:06:37PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:05:19PM -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:45:31PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm machines too > > > > this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP environments, platforms which > > > > support optee should be specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, > > > > for general case it remains 'null' > > > > > > Pulled into the master branch. > > > > I think this was due to the parsing issues, resolved by another patch. What's > > the point of masking this recipes now? > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > index 0000000..a12521d > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > > > > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" > > > > +# Please add supported machines below > > Can we instead of neutering all OPTEE recipes and requiring BSPs to provide > bbappends with COMPATIBLE_MACHINE for opt-in, add EXCLUDE_FROM_WORLD = "1"? its fine to provide it via bbappends, as long as it is per machine, which really supports Optee it is also educational to understand the recipes thats way, excluding from world is then not required. > > -- > Denys ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default 2020-04-13 23:55 ` Khem Raj @ 2020-04-14 0:48 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2020-04-20 13:50 ` Diego Sueiro 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2020-04-14 0:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Khem Raj; +Cc: meta-arm On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 04:55:25PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 3:40 PM Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:06:37PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:05:19PM -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:45:31PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > > all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm machines too > > > > > this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP environments, platforms which > > > > > support optee should be specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, > > > > > for general case it remains 'null' > > > > > > > > Pulled into the master branch. > > > > > > I think this was due to the parsing issues, resolved by another patch. What's > > > the point of masking this recipes now? > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > index 0000000..a12521d > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > > > > > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" > > > > > +# Please add supported machines below > > > > Can we instead of neutering all OPTEE recipes and requiring BSPs to provide > > bbappends with COMPATIBLE_MACHINE for opt-in, add EXCLUDE_FROM_WORLD = "1"? > > its fine to provide it via bbappends, as long as it is per machine, > which really supports Optee > it is also educational to understand the recipes thats way, excluding > from world is then not required. This is rather backwards. OPTEE is widely used these days. What's the harm for the recipe to be fully open and compatible, if it's not being built by default? Otherwise, we should similarly neuter ATF, U-boot and even kernel - not all platforms are supported by those and require per-machine support and configarion added. Why not require those to be opt-in via bbappends? -- Denys ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default 2020-04-14 0:48 ` Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2020-04-20 13:50 ` Diego Sueiro 2020-04-20 17:02 ` Khem Raj 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Diego Sueiro @ 2020-04-20 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org, Khem Raj; +Cc: nd > -----Original Message----- > From: meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org <meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org> > On Behalf Of Denys Dmytriyenko via lists.yoctoproject.org > Sent: 14 April 2020 01:49 > To: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > Cc: meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org > Subject: Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 04:55:25PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 3:40 PM Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:06:37PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:05:19PM -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:45:31PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > > > all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm > > > > > > machines too this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP > > > > > > environments, platforms which support optee should be > > > > > > specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, for general case it > remains 'null' > > > > > > > > > > Pulled into the master branch. > > > > > > > > I think this was due to the parsing issues, resolved by another > > > > patch. What's the point of masking this recipes now? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > > b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > > index 0000000..a12521d > > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > > > > > > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" > > > > > > +# Please add supported machines below > > > > > > Can we instead of neutering all OPTEE recipes and requiring BSPs to > > > provide bbappends with COMPATIBLE_MACHINE for opt-in, add > EXCLUDE_FROM_WORLD = "1"? > > > > its fine to provide it via bbappends, as long as it is per machine, > > which really supports Optee it is also educational to understand the > > recipes thats way, excluding from world is then not required. > > This is rather backwards. OPTEE is widely used these days. > > What's the harm for the recipe to be fully open and compatible, if it's not > being built by default? > > Otherwise, we should similarly neuter ATF, U-boot and even kernel - not all > platforms are supported by those and require per-machine support and > configarion added. Why not require those to be opt-in via bbappends? For `trusted-firmware-a` recipe we use `COMPATIBLE_MACHINE ?= "invalid"` and I think we should we use the same strategy for optee (use the `invalid` term instead of `null`) to maintain consistency. -- *dS > > -- > Denys ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default 2020-04-20 13:50 ` Diego Sueiro @ 2020-04-20 17:02 ` Khem Raj 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Khem Raj @ 2020-04-20 17:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Diego Sueiro; +Cc: meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org, nd On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 6:50 AM Diego Sueiro <Diego.Sueiro@arm.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org <meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org> > > On Behalf Of Denys Dmytriyenko via lists.yoctoproject.org > > Sent: 14 April 2020 01:49 > > To: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > Cc: meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org > > Subject: Re: [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 04:55:25PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 3:40 PM Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:06:37PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 06:05:19PM -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:45:31PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > > > > all arm SOCs may not support optee and there are non-arm > > > > > > > machines too this makes this recipe fit into mutli-BSP > > > > > > > environments, platforms which support optee should be > > > > > > > specifically called out via COMPATIBLE_MACHINE, for general case it > > remains 'null' > > > > > > > > > > > > Pulled into the master branch. > > > > > > > > > > I think this was due to the parsing issues, resolved by another > > > > > patch. What's the point of masking this recipes now? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > > > b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > > > index 0000000..a12521d > > > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > > > +++ b/meta-arm/recipes-security/optee/optee.inc > > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > > > > > > > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "null" > > > > > > > +# Please add supported machines below > > > > > > > > Can we instead of neutering all OPTEE recipes and requiring BSPs to > > > > provide bbappends with COMPATIBLE_MACHINE for opt-in, add > > EXCLUDE_FROM_WORLD = "1"? > > > > > > its fine to provide it via bbappends, as long as it is per machine, > > > which really supports Optee it is also educational to understand the > > > recipes thats way, excluding from world is then not required. > > > > This is rather backwards. OPTEE is widely used these days. > > > > What's the harm for the recipe to be fully open and compatible, if it's not > > being built by default? > > > > Otherwise, we should similarly neuter ATF, U-boot and even kernel - not all > > platforms are supported by those and require per-machine support and > > configarion added. Why not require those to be opt-in via bbappends? > > For `trusted-firmware-a` recipe we use `COMPATIBLE_MACHINE ?= "invalid"` > and I think we should we use the same strategy for optee (use the `invalid` > term instead of `null`) to maintain consistency. > sure send a patch, I think that's fine. > -- > *dS > > > > > -- > > Denys ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-04-20 17:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-04-12 5:45 [meta-arm][PATCH] optee-os: Mark recipes dormant by default Khem Raj
2020-04-13 22:05 ` Jon Mason
2020-04-13 22:06 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
[not found] ` <16058061C39D13E2.17445@lists.yoctoproject.org>
2020-04-13 22:40 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2020-04-13 23:55 ` Khem Raj
2020-04-14 0:48 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2020-04-20 13:50 ` Diego Sueiro
2020-04-20 17:02 ` Khem Raj
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.