Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [meta-ti] [master][PATCH v2] meta-ti-bsp: Graphics recipe overhaul

["Sapp, Randolph" <rs@ti.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1770 bytes --]

On Thu, Dec 22 2022 at 17:47:46 -05:00:00, Denys Dmytriyenko 
<denis@denix.org> wrote:
> So, "gpu" flag specifically means HW-accelerated 3D graphics core,
> regardless of the model, generation or driver used. That covers
> SGX and Rogue now. You can still build Mesa and other graphics
> components w/o "gpu" flag for software rendering just fine.

Thanks for the history lesson, but this use of the GPU flag has changed 
over the years. We have overrides *for some reason* to drop 
functionality of certain packages when GPU is not present -- even 
though software rasterization could still be used here (take a look at 
gstreamer). This is in addition to a rickety dependency chain that 
seems to completely drop all graphics tooling when "gpu" is not present 
(talk to the guys working on am62a right now).

The issue I am trying to solve with the new machine feature is there is 
a mix of packages/pkgconfigs that should be tweaked for each of the 
following conditions:
  - sgx grahpics
  - rogue graphics
  - swrast grahpics
  - no graphics

Where the following should occur:
  - SGX grahpics should conflict with ROGUE (different umlibs, km, and 
mesa patches)
  - Both SGX and ROGUE should pull in all the same packages as swrast, 
only mesa should be configured differently (unless some userspace tools 
have their own swrast tooling which is rare but not impossible)
  - No graphics should do what dropping the GPU feature currently does 
-- completely remove all graphics libraries and swrast tools.

Now, if you believe "screen" should be used in place of the "gpu" 
machine feature in my current system; that's fine, I can update the 
configs accordingly but a new machine feature or something similar will 
be required to differentiate between SGX/RGX.



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2104 bytes --]