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 BAF15C021B8 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 15:35:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fllvem-ot03.ext.ti.com (fllvem-ot03.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.245]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.8808.1740584097348298624 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 07:34:57 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=fail reason="dkim: body hash did not verify" header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17Q1 header.b=X4Iclejr; spf=pass (domain: ti.com, ip: 198.47.19.245, mailfrom: reatmon@ti.com) Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by fllvem-ot03.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 51QFYsbL1502867 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:34:54 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1740584094; bh=/oHJQg/3x2Hz/OoBDy8ZRC0GNbF/Rbsv6HCCnV7aLcI=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=X4IclejrsPajj3EOemthR/7Z7rcUd80HSW6rFvYdhLnAiWdSo09NKKAqJ20PQe7Om pWiQRbmPHEjejwFQlvGivrVR8dIa+J/aB5Z13Ap7mT8WvP0rE+UOVIcVmohkjRdBJi CE+bmniefo/xGQgYPar7TG9Qa7mMUc0+nWMF0vLA= Received: from DFLE113.ent.ti.com (dfle113.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.34]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 51QFYs4A027351; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:34:54 -0600 Received: from DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) by DFLE113.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:34:53 -0600 Received: from lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.250) 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 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:34:53 -0600 Received: from [128.247.81.69] (dtmxl9433pnr.dhcp.ti.com [128.247.81.69]) by lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 51QFYrRS120341; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:34:53 -0600 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:34:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [meta-arago][master/scarthgap][PATCH] meta-arago-extras: v4l-utils: Add recipe for v1.28.1 To: Yemike Abhilash Chandra , Denys Dmytriyenko CC: , , , , , References: <20250211075813.970579-1-y-abhilashchandra@ti.com> <20250211205111.GU21608@denix.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Ryan Eatmon In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed X-C2ProcessedOrg: 333ef613-75bf-4e12-a4b1-8e3623f5dcea Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fllvem-ot03.ext.ti.com id 51QFYsbL1502867 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 ; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 15:35:01 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/message/15920 On 2/16/2025 11:48 PM, Yemike Abhilash Chandra wrote: > Hello everyone, >=20 > I have provided my response regarding the concerns raised. > Since I haven=E2=80=99t heard back, I wanted to check if you had > any further thoughts. >=20 > Please let me know how you'd like to proceed. One final question... You said that this patch is for master as well,=20 but I'm seeing a collision between this and the same recipe from=20 meta-openembedded on master. Should this patch be applied to master? Or=20 is the meta-openembedded version good enough? > Thanks and Regards, > Yemike Abhilash Chandra. >=20 > On 12/02/25 13:46, Yemike Abhilash Chandra wrote: >> >> >> On 12/02/25 02:21, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 01:28:13PM +0530, Yemike Abhilash Chandra via= =20 >>> lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: >>>> An older recipe of v4l-utils (v1.26.1) is present in the meta-oe lay= er >>>> for scarthgap. >>>> >>>> TI's 6.12 based kernel has backported multistream routing APIs from >>>> upstream kernel, which requires v4l-utils to be the latest released >>>> version (v1.28.1). >>>> >>>> Thus we override the recipe in this layer to the latest release of >>>> v4l-utils. >>> >>> There are few issues with this... >>> >>> Do you really need to override the entire recipe? The old .bbappend w= as >>> applying a patch already - can you add a new patch to that and bump=20 >>> SRCREV? >>> >> >> We are not only updating the SRCREV, but also moving to a newer branch >> (stable-1.28), which is why we considered overriding the entire recipe. >> This approach aligns with how we have handled previously, including >> 6.1 timeline, where we followed a similar process.[1] >> >> Given that the original recipe package still references an older versi= on, >> do you suggest that we update the branch in the existing .bbappend, >> even though the base recipe remains on an older version? >> >> Please let me know if you want me to do that way. >> >> [1]:=20 >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230525104036.2050245-1-j-luthra@ti.com/ >> >> Thanks, >> Yemike Abhilash Chandra >> >>> If you do need to override the entire recipe, then you first need to=20 >>> clearly >>> articulate your reason in the commit log - wanting a newer commit=20 >>> isn't such >>> a reason >>> >>> Then you need to do it in 2 steps/patches - first you copy over the=20 >>> existing >>> recipe verbatim w/o any modifications, and in a separate step make yo= ur >>> modifications >>> >>> Also, having own copy of an upstream recipe requires special=20 >>> attention to not >>> violate the Yocto Project Compatible guidelines. I've explained this=20 >>> recently >>> in another thread here on the list >>> --=20 Ryan Eatmon reatmon@ti.com ----------------------------------------- Texas Instruments, Inc. - LCPD - MGTS