From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA0CC25B4E for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 18:50:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com (lelv0142.ext.ti.com [198.47.23.249]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.83265.1674240627505593952 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:50:27 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17q1 header.b=lxCd+OZD; spf=pass (domain: ti.com, ip: 198.47.23.249, mailfrom: rs@ti.com) Received: from fllv0034.itg.ti.com ([10.64.40.246]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 30KIoMjA087406; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:50:22 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1674240622; bh=5025geGtiknqMwolkcbLLBRGfQ9pcYg/jstEvoLvVdQ=; h=Date:From:Subject:To:CC:In-Reply-To:References; b=lxCd+OZDzi9IyffTl8WOHKXwuAIQG08l37D3N5+uoFSIYGMwiI8TmpB1CVVUd/1dl Pd7t/QpQTsGdZGQQNddrnIzPzZgX3ONjZs6qOKObAjh/7h62KG93Lm1sbqIwPr5UPr GnOVLdCIcoti8J9ZpnwVrMJdl55Y7KAZlvBHJPVE= Received: from DFLE109.ent.ti.com (dfle109.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.30]) by fllv0034.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 30KIoMLl063837 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:50:22 -0600 Received: from DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) by DFLE109.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.16; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:50:22 -0600 Received: from lelv0327.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.183) by DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.16 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:50:22 -0600 Received: from res.dhcp.ti.com (ileaxei01-snat2.itg.ti.com [10.180.69.6]) by lelv0327.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 30KIoLNQ043267; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:50:21 -0600 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:50:16 -0600 From: "Sapp, Randolph" Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [meta-ti] [master/kirkstone][PATCH] all: Graphics recipe overhaul To: Denys Dmytriyenko CC: , , , , Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20230120182636.GP22689@denix.org> References: <20230119204026.1297616-1-rs@ti.com> <20230120182636.GP22689@denix.org> X-Mailer: geary/40.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 18:50:30 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/15613 On Fri, Jan 20 2023 at 01:26:36 PM -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > E.g. if you are copying the entire Mesa set of recipes, include files > and > patches, it should have been a separate patch with just that w/o any > modifications, clearly stating that this is a verbatim copy and > specify which > repo and branch/tag they are being picked up from - openembedded-core > repo, > kirkstone branch. > > But then I would argue that a simple mesa_%.bbappend is smaller and > much > easire to review. For example, I took your previous v4 revision of > the patch > and dropped all copies of upstream Mesa, replacing it with a bbappend: > https://patchwork.yoctoproject.org/project/ti/patch/20230119010333.3414485-1-denis@denix.org/ Right, sorry about that. You are correct that the duplication of mesa and mesa patches should have occurred in a separate patch, however it should not be a blanket BB appends. The reason this duplication exists is that upstream mesa will move faster than our modified versions (as much as I would like to avoid it) and this will prevent things from silently creeping forward and breaking. The umlibs are still dependent on particular, patched releases of mesa. On Fri, Jan 20 2023 at 01:26:36 PM -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > I looked at this repo - it's a personal copy of upstream Mesa with > Imagination > PVR patches applied on top. Was it reviewed and approved by OSRB? > Were the > patches made public before and/or permitted to be > published/distributed? Those patches inherited the license of mesa and therefore did not need approval from OSRB. I did, however, get IMG's grace to release them anyway. The reason why it's a personal repo is there is certain functionality that I believe can be upstreamed and I believe hosting that process on freedesktop will help reduce friction and be a little more transparent about our efforts. On Fri, Jan 20 2023 at 01:26:36 PM -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > Only rogue? Only rogue. I added all the necessary hooks for sgx but it still needs work before it can fall in line with my changes. The mesa layer needs some TLC and the umlibs will need some packaging changes. Thankfully SGX can now be disabled until we have it working by removing powervr-sgx-graphics from the distro features string.