On 6/5/2023 8:30 AM, Ryan Eatmon via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
On 6/5/2023 8:11 AM, Paresh Bhagat wrote:
Add new recipe for u-boot-ti-jailhouse and linux-ti-jailhouse which will
be used for jailhouse for am62xx-evm.
Jailhouse support for am62xx-evm requires few patches for u-boot and
linux
which are hosted at processor-sdk/u-boot and processor/linux
respectively.
To build a image with jailhouse for am62xx-evm, these recipes
will be used instead of u-boot-ti-staging and linux-ti-staging by
changing
the preferred_provider.
Signed-off-by: Paresh Bhagat <[email protected]>
---
.../recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-ti-jailhouse_2023.04.bb | 9 +++++++++
.../recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-jailhouse_6.1.bb | 9 +++++++++
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-ti-jailhouse_2023.04.bb
create mode 100644
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-jailhouse_6.1.bb
diff --git
a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-ti-jailhouse_2023.04.bb
b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-ti-jailhouse_2023.04.bb
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..079d55dd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-ti-jailhouse_2023.04.bb
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+require u-boot-ti-staging_2023.04.bb
+
+# This will have priority over generic uboot path
+
+BRANCH = "ti-u-boot-2023.04-jailhouse"
+
+UBOOT_GIT_URI = "git://git.ti.com/git/processor-sdk/u-boot.git"
What is reasoning for not upstreaming these patches (both u-boot and
kernel) even just into the TI repositories?
My concern is the CICD process. This is adding another recipe with a
completely different linux/u-boot repository that we need to add support
for to keep the recipes up to date.
And you guys will to keep rebasing these patches on top of the latest
6.1 prod branch when CICD promotes.
This just feels like something that is going to turn into a lot of
maintenance work in the future.
After discussing this with Praneeth, these recipes should not be called
jailhouse, but rather something more generic (maybe experiments). We do
not want to explode the number of recipes in the directory with every
experiment we want to run in the future... We can then configure which
branch under the experiments to pick based on something in the distro
features or via machine features.
And upon further reflection, do we want to create a new layer under the
meta-ti repo to house all of these new changes and not host them in
meta-ti-bsp? Basically keep meta-ti-bsp as the production versions of
code? Any thoughs Andrew, Denys, Randolph?
+SRCREV = "79615e1c99b9aa73948f811f5f866cff2e34dc37"
diff --git
a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-jailhouse_6.1.bb
b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-jailhouse_6.1.bb
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..8e1edb55
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-jailhouse_6.1.bb
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+require linux-ti-staging_6.1.bb
+
+# Use different commit, repo and branch for jailhouse build
+
+BRANCH = "ti-linux-6.1.y-jailhouse"
+
+SRCREV = "0ed0dec2462b805b0188fe080895adc437871549"
+
+KERNEL_GIT_URI = "git://git.ti.com/git/processor-sdk/linux.git"
--
Ryan Eatmon [email protected]
-----------------------------------------
Texas Instruments, Inc. - LCPD - MGTS
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#16670):
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/16670
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/99339809/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/leave/6695321/21656/1393940836/xyzzy
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
