On 11/3/2023 1:15 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 09:57:11AM -0500, Ryan Eatmon wrote:
On 10/26/2023 9:00 AM, Andrew Davis wrote:
On 10/25/23 10:27 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 11:56:30AM -0500, Andrew Davis via
lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <[email protected]>
---
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/cadence-mhdp-fw/cadence-mhdp-fw_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/cnm-wave-fw/cnm-wave-fw_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/cpsw9g-eth-fw/cpsw9g-eth-fw_git.bb | 1 -
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/goodix-fw/goodix-fw_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/prueth-fw/prueth-fw-am65x-sr2_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/prueth-fw/prueth-fw-am65x_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/pruhsr-fw/pruhsr-fw-am65x-sr2_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/prusw-fw/prusw-fw-am65x-sr2_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/ti-img-encode-decode/vxd-dec-fw_git.bb | 2 --
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/vis-fw/vis_01.50.07.15.bb | 1 -
meta-ti-bsp/recipes-bsp/vpdma-fw/vpdma-fw_03-2012.bb | 1 -
11 files changed, 19 deletions(-)
Overall I agree and fully support the first 7 patches in this series.
But for this last one I wanted to open a discussion.
I try to sort my series in least-to-most likely to be controversial, I was
just wondering how far we would get down the list, glad we got to 8 :)
On one hand I understand the desire to make components as
generic as possible
and reduce the number of machine-specific components to a bare minimum.
But on another hand, marking the resulting package as
machine-specific when it
has a short list of compatible machines is a standard practice.
The reason is
that the list of compatible machines controls only compile time
filtering, but
doesn't have any effect on run time. And marking packages as
machine specific
helps with that. That closes the loophole of installing
incompatible packages.
For example, first recipe below specifies that Cadence MHDP firmware is
compatible with 3 J7 platforms only (or their SoC families, to be exact).
But w/o marking resulting binary package as machine-specific (therefore
producing separate packages for those platforms), there will be a single
generic Aarch64 package made. And there's no protection from installing
this generic package on non-compatible platforms, like J7200 or AM65xx,
either manullay or by pulling it into a rootfs for those incompatible
platforms.
And you normally want to prevent this for regular components. But I guess
this doesn't fully apply to FW images that are loaded by corresponding
drivers anyway. Moreover, there's no compilation involved, just packaging
the binary blob.
In that case, should we also remove COMPATIBLE_MACHINE from
these firmware
recipes?
That is exactly where I was going to go next. These firmware packages are
not technically incompatible with the other machines.
We just use COMPATIBLE_MACHINE checks here to keep us from
accidentily bundling
them with images where they wouldn't add any value (which you did
with prusw-fw
which is what stated me thinking on all this). But since they don't break
anything either, forcing them to be machine specific seemed like
overkill also.
Only place where we still need this is firmware recipes that only
ship some of
the firmware based on machine (see prueth-fw for instance). I'd like to get
that cleaned up next. If we only want some of the firmware then we
should split
it into different packages (prueth-fw-am57xx, etc.) and only
install the one
we want for that platform.
Denys, does Andrew's response address your concerns?
Well, I do believe we are generally in agreement here. But I'm not sure if
that means we should merge patch #8 as is and address COMPATIBLE_MACHINE
changes later, or rework the patch to address that with MACHINE_ARCH together?
Ok. I'll accept 1-7 and reject 8 for now. 8 can be resubmitted once
those additional changes are made and can be taken all at once.
--
Ryan Eatmon [email protected]
-----------------------------------------
Texas Instruments, Inc. - LCPD - MGTS
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#17234):
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/17234
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/102182712/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/leave/6695321/21656/1393940836/xyzzy
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
