From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com (bear.ext.ti.com [192.94.94.41]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C46E005A1 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dlep33.itg.ti.com ([157.170.170.112]) by bear.ext.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id p9DIXgw3005797 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:33:44 -0500 Received: from dlep26.itg.ti.com (smtp-le.itg.ti.com [157.170.170.27]) by dlep33.itg.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9DIXgCe023377; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:33:42 -0500 (CDT) Received: from DLEE74.ent.ti.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dlep26.itg.ti.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9DIXgGo028137; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:33:42 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dlelxv22.itg.ti.com (172.17.1.197) by DLEE74.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:33:41 -0500 Received: from [172.24.16.43] (h16-43.vpn.ti.com [172.24.16.43]) by dlelxv22.itg.ti.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9DIXfJ4020148; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:33:41 -0500 Message-ID: <4E972F04.4030908@ti.com> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:33:40 -0400 From: William Mills User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jack Mitchell References: <4E933C41.4000207@linux.intel.com> <4E94D624.1020107@am.sony.com> <4E95C787.3020000@linux.intel.com> <4E96A198.9030109@communistcode.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4E96A198.9030109@communistcode.co.uk> Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: RFC: User configurable recipe features X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:33:47 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/13/2011 04:30 AM, Jack Mitchell wrote: > On 12/10/2011 17:59, Darren Hart wrote: >> >> On 10/11/2011 04:49 PM, Tim Bird wrote: >>> On 10/10/2011 11:41 AM, Darren Hart wrote: >>>> As part of working on meta-tiny, I've come across a need (want?) to >>>> present users with the ability to select some set of features in a >>>> local >>>> configuration file that will impact the build of the image and a >>>> set of >>>> recipes. >>> Can you tell me more about meta-tiny? this is the first I've heard >>> about this (sorry if discussion went by on the mailing list and I >>> missed it), and I'm very interested. >>> >>> I'm currently doing some size-related work for Sony (including >>> some work to support 4K stacks). >>> >> Perhaps while I have the attention of a few interested parties, it would >> be a good time for a poll. I'm interested in your motivation for smaller >> images. >> >> Are you building SoC's with memory on die and needing to keep the memory >> footprint down to save precious die real-estate? > > no > >> >> Are you looking at creating mass-market products and saving a few >> pennies on the flash storage translates to real money, so you want to >> minimize the physical size? > > no > >> >> Are you concerned with boot time, and have connected larger image sizes >> with longer boot times? > > I am concerned with boot time, but don't believe it is image size that > ramps it up. > >> >> Is there another motivating factor for your interest in small images? > > Yes, a smaller system which is easier to check, build and maintain. In > my office I am the leading driver for using linux in a team of 3 (two > software, one fpga developer) so the less time I spend building, > rebuilding and checking features I don't need, to ensure they don't > comprimise the stability of the system, the more faith they have in > the system I'm putting forward. > Ahhh, nice one Jack. I had a similar thought this morning. As the target system gets smaller the tolerance for spending X amount of time building non-target code goes down and the expectation of being able to use a "modest machine" goes up. What is a modest machine? Yocto quotes build times for a "refernce machine" that is pretty up to date and not on the low end. To me, a modest machine is the laptop Mom & Dad bought "Stacy" when she graduated from High School and went off to College. Stacy is now a junior and is exploring embedded Linux. This might be an i3 2 GB machine. A China based startup may also give its engineers modest machines. I think many TI'ers would claim they have been stuck on modest machines for long periods. So If a sato image takes 1 hour to build on the reference machine it may take 4 hours to build on a modest machine. Of that time perhaps 1 hr is spent building host side stuff. If your image is just kernel, busybox, and uclibc you probably only spend 1/2 hour building that on a modest machine. Question is does oe-core/poky still make you build 1 hr worth of host stuff? I know Richard's answer will be shared state but I want to see how that really works out. This is an area we plan on playing with over the next release cycle. >> Thanks, >> > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto