Hi Leif,
On 2019.10.21 14:46, Leif Lindholm wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 03:24:47PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 at 15:09, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 10/21/19 2:52 PM, Pete Batard wrote:
Hi Philippe,
On 2019.10.21 13:28, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Hi Pete,
On 10/21/19 1:25 PM, Pete Batard wrote:
In preparation for adding Raspberry Pi 4 support, the Pi 3 platform
is restructured by factorizing all the drivers and libraries that are
going to be commonly used by the two platforms.
Because much of the Pi 4 SoC is an extension of the Pi 3 one this
means that almost everything, except the ACPI tables, is moved up
into a new common RaspberryPi/ subdirectory that will serve both
platforms. The .dec is also moved to this directory, under a new
RaspberryPi.dec name, and existing references to it are updated.
...
This change seems not related to the rest of your refactor.
It is. See https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/49288
The problem is we have no choice but to break the patch in two sections,
one that applies to edk2-platforms and the other to edk2-non-osi, since
these are separate repos, and the LogoDxe changes belong to non-osi.
We need to have part of the non-osi patch that is applied to
edk2-platforms, and it would make little sense to break it down into the
non-osi related and platforms related, since it still relies on the
non-osi changes having been applied.
I see.
If anything, I guess we could consider that the non-osi patch should
come first. Still, whatever we do here, as long as only one of non-osi
and platform is applied, builds are going to be broken, and there is no
way to fix that unless you do consider the set of platforms + non-osi as
a single patch.
Agreed, this is a egg/chicken problem.
I dealt with this in the past by just making sure the non-osi and
platform changes are applied at the same time. So it is good to make
note of this in the cover letter, but other than that, there is no way
we can apply interdependent changes to two separate repositories at
the same time without either breaking bisect for one of them, or
making a huge effort to add temporary code, defines etc that will be
removed again right after the changes have landed.
Agreed. My preference would be to treat edk2-non-osi as the chicken,
and edk2-platforms the egg. I could put the requisite edk2-non-osi
hash into the edk2-platforms commit message before pushing, adding a
line like:
"This commit requires the edk2-non-osi in use to contain commit <hash>
in order to build."
If I'm feeling nitpicky, that could replace the comment
"No other changes are being applied at this stage."
Pete: would you be OK with those two changes?
Sounds good. Feel free to go ahead with these changes, thanks.
/Pete
Best Regards,
Leif
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#49305): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/49305
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/36312720/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
