Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 0/3] tinit and stm32f746_disco_sd_defconfig

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org>]

Hello Dario,

On Sat,  3 Aug 2024 17:55:14 +0200
Dario Binacchi <dario.binacchi@amarulasolutions.com> wrote:

> This series is inspired by reading the following topic:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/buildroot/20230206230203.70e2dbd8@windsurf/T
> 
> Starting from that patch, and following Thomas Petazzoni's suggestions
> regarding the possibility of using a single minimal script without
> duplicating it within Buildroot, I developed these three patches.
> Meanwhile, the configuration for the stm32f746_disco board was useful
> for developing the display support for the board, which was later
> merged into Linux.
> 
> Dario Binacchi (3):
>   package/tinit: new package
>   configs/stm32f746_disco_sd_defconfig: new defconfig
>   board/canaan/k210-soc: use tinit as Linux init process

From a high-level point of view, I think it looks fine, though I'd
really like to have some opinion from some of the other maintainers on
this.

Maybe some comments:

- I don't really think it's super useful to have a Github project for
  tinit. The script could just as well be inside package/tinit

- Should it be named tinyinit instead of tinit, just to make things
  clear?

- I believe you should drop entirely the logo thing in tinit, we don't
  have such "logos" in any other Buildroot defconfig, so I don't see
  why we would have one for those super small noMMU defconfigs. This
  would allow to get rid of tiny-setup.sh stuff.

>  .../stm32f746-disco/busybox-tiny.config       | 230 ++++++++++++++++++

Why do we need a busybox-tiny.config? We already have
package/busybox/busybox-minimal.config. How different are they?

Thanks!

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