On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 02:14:56PM +0000, Maupin, Chase wrote:
> >-----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}
Also, please don't use dashes in variable names! Underscores, while not
recommended, are still acceptable:
LLDBLDDIR - best from Bitbake perspective, not very human-readable
LLD_BLD_DIR - not perfect from Bitbake perspective, but parseable and readable
LLD-BLD-DIR - may cause all kinds of issues
> 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
_______________________________________________
meta-arago mailing list
[email protected]
http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago
