>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email protected] [mailto:meta-arago-
>[email protected]] On Behalf Of Aravind Batni
>Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 4:15 PM
>To: [email protected]
>Cc: Aravind Batni
>Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH] ti-rm: provides ti resouce manager
>recipe for KeyStone devices
>
>- TI Resource Manager Low Level Driver
>
>Signed-off-by: Aravind Batni <[email protected]>
>---
> meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm.inc | 7 ++++
> meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm_git.bb | 45
>++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm.inc
> create mode 100644 meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-
>rm_git.bb
>
>diff --git a/meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm.inc b/meta-
>arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm.inc
>new file mode 100644
>index 0000000..96da467
>--- /dev/null
>+++ b/meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm.inc
>@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
>+LICENSE = "TI BSD"
>+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM =
>"file://COPYING.txt;md5=dc61631b65360e6beb73b6c337800afc"
>+
>+BRANCH="master"
>+SRC_URI = "git://git.ti.com/keystone-rtos/rm-
>lld.git;protocol=git;branch=${BRANCH}"
>+# Below commit ID corresponds to DEV.RM_LLD.02.00.00.08
>+SRCREV = "3a73cfe015214ff0401639f85fa5e52ea610e59d"
If you aren't going to have multiple versions of a recipe the .inc is not
required. If you do plan for multiple versions then the SRCREV at least is
probably best left in the version specific recipe and not in the .inc. Looking
at this I would think it likely that you could/should just roll this .inc into
the regular .bb recipe.
>diff --git a/meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm_git.bb
Looking at the SRCREV below do you want to call this 02.00.00.08 version of the
recipe instead of just _git?
>b/meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm_git.bb
>new file mode 100644
>index 0000000..7c8dad0
>--- /dev/null
>+++ b/meta-arago-extras/recipes-bsp/ti-rm/ti-rm_git.bb
>@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
>+DESCRIPTION = "TI Resource Manager Low Level Driver"
>+
>+COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "keystone"
>+
>+PR = "r0"
You should probably set PV here if you are not going to change this recipe to a
specific version.
>+DEPENDS="ti-ipc"
>+LLD-NAME="rm"
>+
>+include ti-rm.inc
>+
>+S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
>+LLD-BLD-DIR="${S}/ti/drv"
>+
>+PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-test"
>+
>+FILES_${PN}-test = "${bindir}/rmDspClientTest_*.out \
>+ ${bindir}/rmLinuxClientTest_*.out \
>+ ${bindir}/ti/drv/rm/test/dts_files/*.dtb"
>+
>+do_configure () {
>+# tweak the directory structure to LLD way
>+ cd ${S}
>+ mkdir -p ${LLD-BLD-DIR}
>+ cd ${LLD-BLD-DIR}
>+ ln -s ${S} ${LLD-NAME}
I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to do here. It seems like you
want ${WORKDIR}/git/ti/drv/rm to be pointed to ${S}? Looking below it seems
like you then want to pass ${S}/ti/drm/rm, which points to ${S} to the make
commands. So can't you just point things to ${S}?
Are you trying to work around the Makefile maybe looking for other files in the
ti/drv directory? Since you created that directory that doesn't seem likely
though. This seems like an issue best handled by updating the Makefiles to
allow you to set paths and have a set of defaults. i.e. PATHX ?= "default
path". That way you can update PATHX as a parameter you pass. But this seems
strange to make new direcory structures that then link back to the base
directory you were already in.
>+}
>+
>+do_compile () {
>+# Now build the lld in the updated directory
>+ cd ${LLD-BLD-DIR}/${LLD-NAME}
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 clean
>PDK_INSTALL_PATH=${STAGING_INCDIR} DEVICE=k2h RM_SRC_DIR=${LLD-
>BLD-DIR}/${LLD-NAME}
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 lib tests
>PDK_INSTALL_PATH=${STAGING_INCDIR} DEVICE=k2h RM_SRC_DIR=${LLD-
>BLD-DIR}/${LLD-NAME}
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 lib tests
>PDK_INSTALL_PATH=${STAGING_INCDIR} DEVICE=k2h RM_SRC_DIR=${LLD-
>BLD-DIR}/${LLD-NAME} USEDYNAMIC_LIB=yes
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 clean
>PDK_INSTALL_PATH=${STAGING_INCDIR} DEVICE=k2k RM_SRC_DIR=${LLD-
>BLD-DIR}/${LLD-NAME}
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 lib tests
>PDK_INSTALL_PATH=${STAGING_INCDIR} DEVICE=k2k RM_SRC_DIR=${LLD-
>BLD-DIR}/${LLD-NAME}
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 lib tests
>PDK_INSTALL_PATH=${STAGING_INCDIR} DEVICE=k2k RM_SRC_DIR=${LLD-
>BLD-DIR}/${LLD-NAME} USEDYNAMIC_LIB=yes
Some thoughts:
1. Would this be better done as a for loop iterated of the different DEVICE
settings?
2. Since you don't seem to be breaking these libraries out per DEVICE and I
think you are packaging both static and dynamic libraries would an "all" make
target be better than calling each individually?
- I actually wonder if you would prefer to split dynamic vs. static
libraries. Why are both packaged? Or maybe I don't understand what you are
doing here?
3. Should the libraries be packaged per DEVICE? The root of this question is
whether this recipe should be machine specific and you build the package for
k2k and k2h devices. It seems like you are making one package that has support
for multiple devices.
>+}
>+
>+do_install () {
>+ install -d ${D}/${includedir}/ti/drv/${LLD-NAME}
>+ install -d ${D}/${libdir}
>+ install -d ${D}/${bindir}
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 install installbin installbin_test
>INSTALL_INC_BASE_DIR=${D}/${includedir}
>INSTALL_LIB_BASE_DIR=${D}/${libdir}
>INSTALL_BIN_BASE_DIR=${D}/${bindir} DEVICE=k2h
>+ make -f makefile_armv7 install installbin installbin_test
>INSTALL_INC_BASE_DIR=${D}/${includedir}
>INSTALL_LIB_BASE_DIR=${D}/${libdir}
>INSTALL_BIN_BASE_DIR=${D}/${bindir} DEVICE=k2k
>+}
>--
>1.7.9.5
>
>_______________________________________________
>meta-arago mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago
_______________________________________________
meta-arago mailing list
[email protected]
http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago
