Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 4/4] toolchain/toolchain-bare-metal-buildroot: update help text for multiple tuple support

From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
To: Neal Frager via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org>
Cc: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>,
	ibai.erkiaga-elorza@amd.com, luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com,
	brandon.maier@collins.com, ju.o@free.fr, romain.naour@smile.fr,
	michal.simek@amd.com
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 4/4] toolchain/toolchain-bare-metal-buildroot: update help text for multiple tuple support
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 23:03:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250214230356.7463c628@windsurf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250214165402.1128194-4-neal.frager@amd.com>

Hello Neal,

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 16:54:02 +0000
Neal Frager via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org> wrote:

> Now that binutils-bare-metal, gcc-bare-metal and newlib-bare-metal packages
> have been upgraded to support a list of architecture tuples, this patch
> updates the toolchain-bare-metal-buildroot help text to describe the new
> capability.
> 
> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BARE_METAL_BUILDROOT_ARCH is still backwards compatible with
> its prior definition as defining a single tuple with this new definition
> works exactly the same as before.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>

Overall looks good. Maybe one minor wording comment.

>  config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BARE_METAL_BUILDROOT_ARCH
> -	string "architecture tuple"
> +	string "list of architecture tuples"
>  	help
> -	  This option allows to define the architecture tuple for the
> -	  bare-metal toolchain.
> +	  This option defines a list of architecture tuples for
> +	  building bare metal toolchains.

This option allows to define the list of architecture tuples for which
bare-metal toolchains will be created. One toolchain will be built for
each of the architecture tuples specified in this option.

> +
> +	  For example, to build both a microblaze and a riscv bare

microblaze -> Microblaze

riscv -> RISC-V

> +	  metal toolchain for Xilinx platforms, use the following

I'm not sure the "Xilinx platforms" here is very relevant.

> +	  definition:
> +	  "microblazeel-xilinx-elf riscv32-xilinx-elf"

In fact, I'm not sure the "xilinx" parts of the tuples here are very
relevant/useful. It's the vendor part of the tuple, so it has basically
no effect. It would probably be even more logical to use
microblazel-none-elf, or even microblazeel-buildroot-elf.

Thanks!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot