On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 9:18 AM Quentin Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Khem, > > On December 13, 2021 4:04:03 PM GMT+01:00, Khem Raj <[email protected]> > wrote: > >On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 1:00 AM Quentin Schulz < > >[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi Trevor, > >> > >> Gentle ping :) > >> > >> Honister 3.4.1 being out it's less of an issue but the question remains > >> at least for settling on a policy :) > > > > > >Do we still need this patch ? I think now that dot release is out it’s less > >of a problem. Version specific patching will set a different preset for the > >layer to carry unexcercised patches > > > > We need this patch for honister 3.4 but what I meant is that even though it's > not needed for honister >= 3.4.1, I'm still interested in what the policy > should be. Especially what we should have done between 3.4 and 3.4.1, before > the latter was released. > > I understand the precedent it creates but also, it's a bit sad for a "BSP" > layer to have some support broken between Yocto releases.
I agree with you that broken is not good as it was for sometime, but now with the latest supported release in 3.4 series ( which is 3.4.1) things should be good. > > Cheers, > Quentin > > > > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Quentin > >> > >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 10:50:13AM -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > >> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 10:03 AM Quentin Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On November 16, 2021 6:45:05 PM GMT+01:00, Khem Raj < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 9:12 AM Quentin Schulz < > >> > > >[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 09:08:41AM -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > >> > > >> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 9:04 AM Quentin Schulz > >> > > >> > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 09:00:42AM -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > >> > > >> > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 7:52 AM Quentin Schulz > >> > > >> > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > From Linux kernel v5.14 to v5.14.11 (both included), the > >> Ethernet > >> > > >> MAC > >> > > >> > > > > controller found on RK3399 is not working. > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > A fix is available in v5.14.12 and later (available also in > >> v5.15) > >> > > >> > > > > which is provided here and applied to linux-yocto source > >> tree if > >> > > >> > > > > linux-yocto version is of the impacted ones. > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > The conditional patching is unfortunately required because > >> > > >> Honister 3.4 > >> > > >> > > > > has linux-yocto v5.14.9 and Honister 3.4.1 will have at > >> least > >> > > >> > > > > linux-yocto v5.14.14. > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > Patching piece below looks quite a bit. > >> > > >> > > > lets just fix v5.14.14 and dont worry about 3.4 > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > v5.14.14 is already fixed. The only release currently is 3.4 > >> and I hit > >> > > >> > > that issue, hence the patch. > >> > > >> > > I assume not everybody is updating to 3.4.1 when it's out, I've > >> seen > >> > > >> > > people running behind dot releases. > >> > > >> > > What's bothering you? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > once dot release is out then thats whats maintained not the > >> original > >> > > >> > release since they are incremental. > >> > > >> > the anon python to apply a patch. Can you explain why we want to > >> patch > >> > > >> > applied this way ? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >> I could define a python function and use it like this: > >> > > >> SRC_URI:append:rk3399 = "${@rk3399_fix_mac(d)}" > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Would that work better for you? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >I am not yet convinced why should we have such version specific patch > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > If you could explain what's *really* bothering you, I could try to > >> find a proper explanation or agree with you but it's a bit too vague to me > >> right now. Anyway, I'll do some guesses in the next paragraphs. > >> > > > >> > > Because Ethernet does not work for all RK3399-based boards in the > >> latest and only release of Honister? > >> > > >> > meta-rockchip does not have honister branch for now. So it expects > >> > master to keep working with honister for now. kernel upgrades are > >> > already committed into honister branch on meta-yocto-bsps so fix it > >> > already available in latest honister > >> > branch and will be in imminent point release soon as well. > >> > > >> > > > >> > > meta-rockchip is the BSP layer for Rockchip based devices, if not > >> there, where should I put this patch? > >> > > > >> > > Or are we just going to say "Ethernet does not work, we know" to > >> people asking instead of having this patch in? Obviously you could tell > >> them to upgrade their oe-core/poky git repo to rolling honister or 3.4.1 > >> once it's out but having this patch in avoid those questions. > >> > > > >> > > >> > I would say yes, document it as that of a known issue and possible fix > >> > if someone is using exact point release. They might have snapshotted > >> > meta-rockpi too and in that case it will be easy for them to carry a > >> > local patch if needed. > >> > vesion specific patching would also be setting a not so desired > >> > patching practice, so I am trying to avoid it if we can. > >> > > >> > > I understand we're talking about policy here. I am not fond of this > >> patch either but Ethernet is quite critical on boards which don't have WiFi > >> for example. I don't have anything better to suggest to fix this in the > >> *latest* release. > >> > > >> > Update to latest honister branch or wait for 3.4.1, would be my > >> suggestion. > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Cheers > >> > > Quentin > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Cheers, > >> > > >> Quentin > >> > > >> > >>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#55563): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/55563 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/87097671/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
