[Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/1] ti-gfx: bump to version 5_01_01_01 if EABIhf is used

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/1] ti-gfx: bump to version 5_01_01_01 if EABIhf is used

[Hadrien Boutteville]

SDK 5_01_01_01 only support EABIhf so 5_01_00_01 is still used if
EABIhf is not available.

Signed-off-by: Hadrien Boutteville <hadrien.boutteville@gmail.com>
---
Changes v1 -> v2:
  - bump to 5_01_01_01 only if EABIhf is used as we still need to
    support softfp (Yann)
---
 package/ti-gfx/ti-gfx.mk | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/package/ti-gfx/ti-gfx.mk b/package/ti-gfx/ti-gfx.mk
index 324e19c..53aa846 100644
--- a/package/ti-gfx/ti-gfx.mk
+++ b/package/ti-gfx/ti-gfx.mk
@@ -4,15 +4,17 @@
 #
 ################################################################################
 
-TI_GFX_VERSION = 5_01_00_01
-TI_GFX_SO_VERSION = 1.10.2359475
-
+# SDK 5_01_01_01 only support EABIhf so we downgrade to 5_01_00_01 if we can't
+# use it.
 ifeq ($(BR2_ARM_EABIHF),y)
+TI_GFX_VERSION = 5_01_01_01
 TI_GFX_SOURCE = Graphics_SDK_setuplinux_hardfp_$(TI_GFX_VERSION).bin
 else
+TI_GFX_VERSION = 5_01_00_01
 TI_GFX_SOURCE = Graphics_SDK_setuplinux_softfp_$(TI_GFX_VERSION).bin
 endif
 
+TI_GFX_SO_VERSION = 1.10.2359475
 TI_GFX_SITE = http://downloads.ti.com/dsps/dsps_public_sw/sdo_sb/targetcontent/gfxsdk/$(TI_GFX_VERSION)/exports/
 TI_GFX_LICENSE = Technology / Software Publicly Available
 TI_GFX_LICENSE_FILES = TSPA.txt
-- 
2.0.0

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/1] ti-gfx: bump to version 5_01_01_01 if EABIhf is used

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Dear Hadrien Boutteville,

On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:14:27 +0200, Hadrien Boutteville wrote:

> +# SDK 5_01_01_01 only support EABIhf so we downgrade to 5_01_00_01 if we can't
> +# use it.

The wording is a bit confusing here: you say that "we downgrade to
5_01_00_01 if we can't use it", which to me doesn't make much sense, as
we downgrade to something we can't use :-)

>  ifeq ($(BR2_ARM_EABIHF),y)
> +TI_GFX_VERSION = 5_01_01_01
>  TI_GFX_SOURCE = Graphics_SDK_setuplinux_hardfp_$(TI_GFX_VERSION).bin
>  else
> +TI_GFX_VERSION = 5_01_00_01
>  TI_GFX_SOURCE = Graphics_SDK_setuplinux_softfp_$(TI_GFX_VERSION).bin
>  endif
>  
> +TI_GFX_SO_VERSION = 1.10.2359475

Is the TI_GFX_SO_VERSION the same between both versions of ti-gfx?

Thanks!

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

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/1] ti-gfx: bump to version 5_01_01_01 if EABIhf is used

[Hadrien Boutteville]

Thomas,

On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:46:10 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:14:27 +0200, Hadrien Boutteville wrote:
> 
>> +# SDK 5_01_01_01 only support EABIhf so we downgrade to 5_01_00_01 if we can't
>> +# use it.
> 
> The wording is a bit confusing here: you say that "we downgrade to
> 5_01_00_01 if we can't use it", which to me doesn't make much sense, as
> we downgrade to something we can't use :-)

Erf, yes, in rereading this is actually not clear. I wanted to refer to
EABIhf with "it". I have to fix that.

>>  ifeq ($(BR2_ARM_EABIHF),y)
>> +TI_GFX_VERSION = 5_01_01_01
>>  TI_GFX_SOURCE = Graphics_SDK_setuplinux_hardfp_$(TI_GFX_VERSION).bin
>>  else
>> +TI_GFX_VERSION = 5_01_00_01
>>  TI_GFX_SOURCE = Graphics_SDK_setuplinux_softfp_$(TI_GFX_VERSION).bin
>>  endif
>>  
>> +TI_GFX_SO_VERSION = 1.10.2359475
> 
> Is the TI_GFX_SO_VERSION the same between both versions of ti-gfx?

Yes.

Thanks,

Hadrien