From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([93.97.175.187]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RFl7J-0003TR-8R for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:12:34 +0200 Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with ESMTP id p9HBDD2b004030 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:13:13 +0100 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dan.rpsys.net Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id zjyKN64bs51a for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:13:13 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.1.66] (tim [93.97.173.237]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with ESMTP id p9HBD9nc004017 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:13:11 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:06:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20111017095002.GG12684@jama.jama.net> References: <1318674260-8320-1-git-send-email-Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> <1318674260-8320-2-git-send-email-Martin.Jansa@gmail.com> <1318689013.3158.7.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> <20111015143444.GD12684@jama.jama.net> <1318689610.3158.8.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> <20111017095002.GG12684@jama.jama.net> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.1.91- Message-ID: <1318849592.21775.0.camel@ted> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mesa-dri: move extra DRIMODULES to EXTRA_DRIMODULES X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:12:34 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 11:50 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:40:10PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-10-15 at 16:34 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:30:13PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2011-10-15 at 12:24 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > > > > * this way we can use > > > > > EXTRA_DRIMODULES_armv4t += ",glamo" in meta-openmoko layer and > > > > > EXTRA_DRIMODULES_armv4t += ",foo" in meta-bar layer without knowledge > > > > > of other modules in other layers in stack > > > > > > > > Is this really better than using "DRIMODULES_append_armv4t = ..."? > > > > > > the point is that you don't need to know who is setting swrast there for > > > armv4t... > > > > I'm not sure I understand what you're saying there. Can you be more > > concrete? > > > > > > > > > > It's not really true that you can do it without any knowledge of what > > > > other layers are doing since if you end up with two competing > > > > EXTRA_DRIMODULES_foo overrides then one of them will get lost. > > > > > > > > > > so EXTRA_DRIMODULES_append_armv4t should be fine, right? > > > > Well, yes, but in that case it doesn't seem as though the EXTRA_ bit > > (and this patch) buys anything. > > OK, forget this patch.. I've forgot this behavior of _append_armv4t > syntax.. and I've changed meta-openmoko to use this too. > > can we change x86 and x86-64 examples in mesa-dri.inc to > DRIDRIVERS_append_x86 = ",i915,i965" > DRIDRIVERS_append_x86-64 = ",i915,i965" > so it will work as example for BSP layer maintainers that thay don't > need to care about setting > DRIDRIVERS = "swrast" > for their arch? I'll take that patch... Cheers, Richard