On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/27/2015 02:40 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> >> Hello Nikolay, >> >> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Nikolay Dimitrov <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Add dedicated RIoTboard kernel recipe for easier maintenance and patch >>> cherry-picking. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Dimitrov <[email protected]> >> >> >> I want to check with you if you really want to have a dedicated >> recipe. For bugfixes (as now) you can use a bbappend as a temporary >> solution and, at end of the day, easy to remove once this is fixed in >> the kernel. >> >> Please let me know your thoughts... > > > Do you mean something like this (bbappend in meta-fsl-arm-extra)? > > diff --git a/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc_4.0.bbappend > b/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc_4.0.bbappend > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..d7a4e72 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc_4.0.bbappend > @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ > +FILESEXTRAPATHS_append := ":${THISDIR}/${PN}" > + > +SRC_URI_imx6dl-riotboard = "file://riotboard-specific.patch"
Yes. > Well, imho the difference between bbappending and having a separate > recipe is that the bbappending mechanism is retro-reactive - I can > bbappend patches to linux-fslc but in the meantime the board support > will be broken. > > Maintaining a separate kernel recipe for riotboard is a proactive way, > imho. When linux-fslc updates are happening, they won't immediately > break the riotboard, and after I test the updates I can update SRC_REV > to point it to a specific working commit, or as in my case point > SRC_REV to the latest commit and revert just one specific patch. The > advantage is that all the time the board support will be working. > > This was my motivation for the patch. Please tell me if there are any > drawback of having a separate board kernel recipe. Maintenance burden. Your thought is right but what should have been done was people to report this issue when we included 4.0 recipe. For now a bbappend would work as a band-aid while the real fix is being cooked. I usually do not do design for the exception and I believe linux-fslc once fixed will be kept working for the board. This is really up to you but I think a boot test every time we prepare a bump linux-fslc would be enough to iron out the need of a specific recipe. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 -- _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
