Different u-boot recipes (machine names and provider)

Different u-boot recipes (machine names and provider)

[Jens Lucius]

Hello,

I am working on a custom machine layer, which until now has it´s own 
u-boot recipe for a custom u-boot.

I want to add a recipe for mainline u-boot additional to that. I have 
defined a PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot and 
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader which point to the custom u-boot 
to not break the current build, which can be changed to the mainline 
u-boot if needed to build the mainline.

First question: Do I need to define both PREFERRED_PROVIDER (u-boot and 
virtual/bootloader)? I have seen different approaches in different layers.

Now the hard part: custom u-boot and mainline u-boot have different 
UBOOT_MACHINE values for the same hardware. Is it possible to define 
different values for different u-boot recipes? Right now they are 
defined in the machine configurations. Would it be possible (and 
advisable) to define them in the u-boot recipes themselves? Or is there 
another approach ?

Thanks,

Jens

Re: Different u-boot recipes (machine names and provider)

[Robert P. J. Day]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 2069 bytes --]

On Fri, 6 Mar 2015, Jens Lucius wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am working on a custom machine layer, which until now has it´s own u-boot
> recipe for a custom u-boot.
>
> I want to add a recipe for mainline u-boot additional to that. I have defined
> a PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot and PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader which
> point to the custom u-boot to not break the current build, which can be
> changed to the mainline u-boot if needed to build the mainline.
>
> First question: Do I need to define both PREFERRED_PROVIDER (u-boot and
> virtual/bootloader)? I have seen different approaches in different layers.

  i would *think* you could do the following if you wanted to do it in
two stages for flexibility:

PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader = "u-boot"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot = "u-boot-my-custom-recipe"

  the other option i see being used in the meta-ti layer (which is
probably what you're talking about) sets both to the same TI-specific
value:

ti33x.inc:PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader = "u-boot-ti-staging"
ti33x.inc:PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot = "u-boot-ti-staging"

  i see freescale does the same thing:

# Freescale BSP default providers

PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/xserver = "xserver-xorg"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel ??= "linux-imx"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot ??= "u-boot-fslc"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader ??= "u-boot-fslc"

  i see this as well, which seems like overkill:

PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader_ls102xa ?= "u-boot-ls1"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel_ls102xa ?= "linux-ls1"

  are there any style recommendations for this?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================