From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-il1-f193.google.com (mail-il1-f193.google.com [209.85.166.193]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.21288.1589571175561894766 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 12:32:55 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=DYitKSSY; spf=pass (domain: gmail.com, ip: 209.85.166.193, mailfrom: raj.khem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-il1-f193.google.com with SMTP id n11so3740250ilj.4 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 12:32:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zec+f7IbdwzZFO8Jd9egyObOun2BD5hNtUf267URrAo=; b=DYitKSSY2DBqyn2zSfKqTgD9LiEpiogeMqOKQa92E8UwIK0ck6f7/IcB7m/BqHDxra c274bEsGuZpmih3Jsr9Oe4H+KdU1BTtL9ChNCzL3UiJqv/W41inG4D5fSyIcnxYq6ROf yy380uqZLwAPrgGH/DK41sXxXACnPKP6S07qaNdbZZSNw2qsVR/Fr6rj/YBSHUCpUqaO 1nr2OKwNz2bSSN7DNh8ZxA/nts/LZxL8jDGCy9ZGarCJLBy/Zrl1EUJGnxjXTnBPa/AG QjT5EaOiIMHenuF3XjPQJ7hISnps65rdkFDLojIhpnxgo6Rqmza8ossWdNn5IQXYdh4M CMUw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=zec+f7IbdwzZFO8Jd9egyObOun2BD5hNtUf267URrAo=; b=QBFYDBvC1R0nCpqwfJ3JMhzOx/srK8FhasMIunCob0W4OmV0hvZdpCY0fX6DaoQj06 tHeBIBtZO7bS6b8P+l1p3b6u8g2Yh+oKrxcF2KHUa3uK0FVtneOf4mHKrmn2UebbzxVu CzvedFjhtx3cvNg8gYQAce34GQCBuMG2LUVK+63J33nKfdxwCQHCFHVUTS1Aw8+JoZQS SXlPKON4lIz/4TFj0RVCpY7EXYiieKvie1jsvK1Ybuwy1z7KWERdEEqxgOYEdbhb6ohG 9yGqG4EttVZvxd53qMvJjvG5Tta5VWrFgQlRVNq+OayMfMp8OWOJak/W0l2aAYKN78Pw iTPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532f7nR9l3en+lnrAPksdSMNlDy+vxGchIvV0MUvrOSqIMApONNq Vb8Rn2UzN93WlgI6T3p4RSQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz47MaSCSXNp+V33M8RyL71sP97Sx8A6j8dH1xi26AFkeWgV8medDZKMc7ZmjuBbZNc3os2sw== X-Received: by 2002:a92:8b43:: with SMTP id i64mr5084556ild.171.1589571174822; Fri, 15 May 2020 12:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ?IPv6:2601:646:9200:4e0:33:f6fe:2ae3:dbd8? ([2601:646:9200:4e0:33:f6fe:2ae3:dbd8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g3sm1249470ilq.16.2020.05.15.12.32.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 May 2020 12:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [OE-core][PATCH 0/4] Import recipes from meta-python To: Joshua Watt , Richard Purdie , Denys Dmytriyenko Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org, jdmason@kudzu.us References: <20200514210458.33543-1-JPEWhacker@gmail.com> <20200515185354.GE11927@denix.org> <591d657764bbea63ad2a2fa5cd0587cc305e600a.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: "Khem Raj" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 12:32:53 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/15/20 12:12 PM, Joshua Watt wrote: > > On 5/15/20 2:05 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: >> On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 14:53 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: >>> I see Richard has merged these to master-next, thanks! >>> And thanks Joshua for volunteering to maintain these recipes :) >>> I submitted removal patches to meta-python. >>> >>> So, it is good we are getting this extra dependency resolved in >>> master. The >>> question is - can we get these backported to dunfell, does it qualify? >>> >>> Otherwise Jon wanted to finally branch off meta-arm into dunfell >>> today and >>> we'll have to live with it until gatesgarth. >> I put them into -next so we could test them, see if the autobuilder had >> any surprises. Good news is there weren't any. >> >> The question still remains whether this is the best approach or not and >> some people I talked to were not convinced that a consensus had been >> reached. >> >> The question I guess is how widely used is optee and does it warrant >> adding this? Its a little ironic the thing people want is trusted- >> firmware... > > FWIW, after having gone through the exercise of pulling in TF-A into > qemuarm64, I think I've been convinced that op-tee and TF-A belong > together since they are sometimes tightly integrated together (something > I didn't realize before). As such, having both in the same layer makes > sense. Even if TF-A was in oe-core, you'd probably want op-tee also, > which means the python modules would have to be there anyway. I think we > can still have the discussion about moving the whole lot over there, but > we don't need to do that now, and moving the python recipes at least > cuts out the meta-python dependency. > > My last concern was testing of optee, since there was no platform that > could build it by default, but I fixed that by implemented support for a > qemuarm64-based machine that's defined in meta-arm which uses TF-A + > optee + u-boot and can successful boot using TF-A and passes the op-tee > unit tests, so I don't have any concern about that anymore. > I think getting oe-core qemuarm64 boot with uboot+TF-A as an option sounds good, and if thats more common solution that armv8 devices are following then perhaps would make sense to have this tested in core too. But I guess that can be ironed out. As such python deps I think are good for dunfell too, we have to ensure meta-python removal happens in dunfell as well. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Richard >>