Buildroot Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Buildroot] Bootchart: Submit a patch questions ...
@ 2016-03-24 14:59 g4 at novadsp.com
  2016-03-24 21:15 ` Thomas Petazzoni
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: g4 at novadsp.com @ 2016-03-24 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: buildroot

I've been using bootchart just to experiment with getting stuff into the
buildroot framework. Is there any interest in a patch to add bootchart as an
option?

 

If so I've got a couple of questions:

 

1. For a new package is a single patchfile  acceptable? 

2. Does the makefile need to spell out licensing? (This seems to vary within
BR)?

3. Does the patch need to include the changes to package/config.in? I am
guessing yes .

4. Finally locally BR is configured to get its kernel sources and .config
from a local clone of /linux on github. In such a case can BR actually
correctly check the dependencies for bootchart? Presumably it does test
kernel config settings against the local .config stashed in build?

 

TAIA

 

Jerry.

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20160324/1f77de59/attachment.html>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [Buildroot] Bootchart: Submit a patch questions ...
  2016-03-24 14:59 [Buildroot] Bootchart: Submit a patch questions g4 at novadsp.com
@ 2016-03-24 21:15 ` Thomas Petazzoni
  2016-03-25 10:53   ` g4 at novadsp.com
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Petazzoni @ 2016-03-24 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: buildroot

Hello,

On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 14:59:35 -0000, g4 at novadsp.com wrote:
> I've been using bootchart just to experiment with getting stuff into the
> buildroot framework. Is there any interest in a patch to add bootchart as an
> option?

Yes, if it was useful for you, it might certainly be useful to others.

Though it is worth mentioning that Busybox includes a minimal version
of bootchartd, so maybe the full bootchart is not useful for everybody.
But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have a package for the full featured
bootchart.

> 1. For a new package is a single patchfile  acceptable? 

Yes, if the package is simple.

> 2. Does the makefile need to spell out licensing? (This seems to vary within
> BR)?

Yes, it should. The packages that don't describe the license
information are older packages that have not yet been updated to
include the license information.

> 3. Does the patch need to include the changes to package/config.in? I am
> guessing yes .

Yes.

> 4. Finally locally BR is configured to get its kernel sources and .config
> from a local clone of /linux on github. In such a case can BR actually
> correctly check the dependencies for bootchart? Presumably it does test
> kernel config settings against the local .config stashed in build?

I am not sure to fully understand the question, but if I understand
correctly, you're saying that bootchart requires some specific kernel
configuration options. If that's what you mean, then there are two
cases:

 * If the kernel option is needed for bootchart to actually *build*,
   then you should modify linux/linux.mk to make sure the relevant
   kernel configurations are enabled when bootchart is enabled.

 * If the kernel option is only needed for bootchart to work at
   runtime, then we generally just recommend to indicate which kernel
   options are needed in the help text of bootchart's Config.in file.

Hope this helps,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [Buildroot] Bootchart: Submit a patch questions ...
  2016-03-24 21:15 ` Thomas Petazzoni
@ 2016-03-25 10:53   ` g4 at novadsp.com
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: g4 at novadsp.com @ 2016-03-25 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: buildroot

Hi Thomas

> > 4. Finally locally BR is configured to get its kernel sources and
> > .config from a local clone of /linux on github. In such a case can BR
> > actually correctly check the dependencies for bootchart? Presumably it
> > does test kernel config settings against the local .config stashed in
build?
> 
> I am not sure to fully understand the question, but if I understand
correctly,
> you're saying that bootchart requires some specific kernel configuration
> options. If that's what you mean, then there are two
> cases:
> 
>  * If the kernel option is needed for bootchart to actually *build*,
>    then you should modify linux/linux.mk to make sure the relevant
>    kernel configurations are enabled when bootchart is enabled.
> 
>  * If the kernel option is only needed for bootchart to work at
>    runtime, then we generally just recommend to indicate which kernel
>    options are needed in the help text of bootchart's Config.in file.

Ideal

> Hope this helps,
> 
> Thomas

It most certainly does. Thanks. I'll tidy things up as per recommendations .

Jerry

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2016-03-25 10:53 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-03-24 14:59 [Buildroot] Bootchart: Submit a patch questions g4 at novadsp.com
2016-03-24 21:15 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2016-03-25 10:53   ` g4 at novadsp.com

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox