Re: [meta-ti] [master/scarthgap][PATCH 1/4] conf/machine, ti-bsp: add support for multiple BSP providers

[Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>]

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 04:18:16PM -0500, Ryan Eatmon wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/13/2024 12:22 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >From: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@konsulko.com>
> >
> >This adds a facility to define multiple supported BSPs with their own
> >preferences for individual components, as well as lets machine configs
> >specify conditional configurations for different BSPs.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@konsulko.com>
> 
> 
> 
> >diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-bsp.inc b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-bsp.inc
> >new file mode 100644
> >index 00000000..3bb94a7f
> >--- /dev/null
> >+++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-bsp.inc
> >@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
> >+# Support multiple BSP providers
> >+# The main input is TI_DEFAULT_BSP, which translates into default
> >+# preferences for kernel, bootloader and graphics components, as
> >+# well as a dedicated machine override.
> >+
> >+# Supported options are: mainline, ti-6_6, ti-6_1, bb_org
> >+TI_DEFAULT_BSP ??= "ti-6_6"
> 
> Should this variable be named TI_DEFAULT_BSP?  That implies that
> this is the value of the default for this feature.  But in reality
> this variable is what chooses the TI BSP version.  Should it be
> something like TI_BSP_VERSION instead?

It's not just the version, it's entire BSP stack. E.g. "mainline" vs. "bb_org"
Initially I started with only 2 options - "ti" vs. "bb_org", but eventually 
expanded it to support "mainline" and in case of "ti" also different LTS 
versions - "ti-6_1" and "ti-6_6"... Hence the original name stayed. And not 
sure how long both LTS versions will be supported in meta-ti...

Anyway, I'm fine changing it to something else, but I thing calling it 
"version" will be more confusing.

-- 
Denys