> -----Original Message----- > From: Darren Hart [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 5:44 AM > To: Mittal, AnujX; [email protected]; Ong, Boon Leong > Subject: Re: [meta-intel] [dizzy][PATCH 2/3] meta-crystalforest: add qat > preferred provider > > > > On 7/23/15 9:38 AM, Anuj Mittal wrote: > > Added the qat preferred provider to be qat16. > > > > Signed-off-by: Anuj Mittal <[email protected]> > > --- > > meta-crystalforest/conf/machine/crystalforest.conf | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/meta-crystalforest/conf/machine/crystalforest.conf b/meta- > crystalforest/conf/machine/crystalforest.conf > > index 44b9bb2..84a6df2 100644 > > --- a/meta-crystalforest/conf/machine/crystalforest.conf > > +++ b/meta-crystalforest/conf/machine/crystalforest.conf > > @@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ > > PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel ?= "linux-yocto" > > PREFERRED_VERSION_linux-yocto ?= "3.10%" > > > > +PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/qat ?= "qat16" > > Your cover letter said crystal forest depends on qat15. Why are we > setting it to qat16 here?
Default is going to remain qat16 for highland forest platforms. crystal forest & highland forest platforms use the same machine - crystalforest. > > Is there a reason we are doing this as qat15 and qat16 instead of just > having two qat recipes with different versions and setting the > PREFERRED_VERSION_qat in the machine config? > > e.g. > > qat_15-1.7.0-30.bb > qat_16-2.2.0-30.bb > > PREFERRED_VERSION_qat ?= "15-%" > > There shouldn't be a need for a virtual/qat at all. Both qat15 & qat16 come from the same package. So PV remains the same between these two. I think it was decided to keep separate names like this to avoid any problems with the upgrade path because of same PV. > > -- > Darren Hart > Intel Open Source Technology Center -- _______________________________________________ meta-intel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-intel
