Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v9 10/11] package/ti-rogue-um: new package

From: Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org>
To: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
Cc: buildroot@buildroot.org, Andreas Dannenberg <dannenberg@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v9 10/11] package/ti-rogue-um: new package
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 17:15:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230822171533.77fae599@windsurf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230625101507.GK24952@scaer>

On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 12:15:07 +0200
"Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote:

>     # Usually frowned upon, but much much smaller than a patch to remove
>     # them; anyway, upstream is going to get rid of them in a future
>     # release.
>     define TI_IMG_ROGUE_UMLIBS_CLEANUP
>         $(Q)rm -rf $(@D)/targetfs/*/wayland/release/etc/init.d/
>     endef
>     TI_IMG_ROGUE_UMLIBS_POST_EXTRACT_HOOKS += TI_IMG_ROGUE_UMLIBS_CLEANUP

Why don't we simply not install it?

> Of course, this raises the issue that BR2_TARGET_TI_K3_IMAGE_GEN_SOC_*
> are no longer specific to ti-k3-image-gen, but are shared with a few
> packages.
> 
> In which case it may make sense to have those moved to a common
> Config.in, like is done for the freescale-imx stuff.
> 
> I.e. add a new BR2_PACKAGE_TI_AM6XX option, and the SoC selection can be
> moved there, with all common options, and packages (ti-k3-image-gen,
> ti-core-secdev-k3, etc...) can all depend on that option; packages in
> package/ can be made to appear in a "TI AM6xx" sub-menu, and packages in
> boot/ can just depend on it too.

I did indeed add a choice of SoC within the ti-k3-image-gen package,
and I rely on it in the u-boot package to know which DM firwmare to
use. While doing this, I was wondering if it wouldn't make sense to
promote this SoC selection at a higher-level. Indeed, we have more and
more packages that are platform-specific (OpenGL implementation, weird
firmware stuff), and many of those need to have details on the specific
SoC being used.

So would it make sense, at least for some platforms to have some sort
of top-level option where we could say "I have a Freescale i.MX6ULL" or
"I have a Broadcom BCM2835" so that packages can then do what they
think they should do? Of course, the idea is not to list the zillions
of ARM SoCs that exist, but only the ones for which we have specific
packages. We would have a default "Generic" platform if none of the SoC
known by Buildroot fits what the user has.

I can probably cook some initial prototype, just to give a more
specific idea of what I'm talking about.

Thoughts?

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot