On 2/16/14, 18:37, "Ong, Boon Leong" <boon.leong....@intel.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message----- >> From: linux-yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:linux-yocto- >> boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Darren Hart >> Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2014 8:31 AM >> To: Linux Yocto >> Cc: Darren Hart >> Subject: [linux-yocto] [PATCH 2/2] intel-core*: Add baytrail soc support >> >> Include the BayTrail SoC feature in the two intel-common BSPs. The >>BayTrail >> SoC is used in both 32 and 64 bit environments. >> >> Signed-off-by: Darren Hart <dvh...@linux.intel.com> >> --- >> .../bsp/intel-common/intel-core2-32.scc | 5 ++++- >> .../bsp/intel-common/intel-corei7-64.scc | 5 ++++- >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/intel-common/intel-core2-32.scc >> b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/intel-common/intel-core2-32.scc >> index 5938932..b6d18a4 100644 >> --- a/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/intel-common/intel-core2-32.scc >> +++ b/meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/intel-common/intel-core2-32.scc >> @@ -7,7 +7,10 @@ >> >> include cfg/x86.scc >> >> -# Supported platforms >> +# Supported platforms and SoCs >> +include features/soc/baytrail/baytrail.scc > >With the above included and more SoC in future into intel-core2-32.scc >& intel-corei7-64.scc, platform that subscribes to either intel-core2-32 >or >intel-corei7-64 will carry all the configs in each platform. >Is there any reason behind this inclusion? >Are we still adding the soc specific xxx.scc be into >meta-intel/recipes-kernel/ >linux/linux-yocto_x.x.bbappend "KERNEL_FEATURES_" ? The key distinction between features/soc/* and bsp/* is the former adds support for specific pieces of silicon, while the latter adds support for specific boards. That difference doesn't exist in the meta-data currently, but it should. Only board-specific information should go under bsp/, which means that directory should be able to be thinned out considerably for IA. Any board-specific configuration data should be first placed in the meta-intel recipe-space meta-data, and only in linux-yocto meta-data under bsp as a last resort. For example, fri2 sys940x and crownbay all enable the queensbay platform and the tunnel creek SoC. There is a lot of duplication there which we can minimize by putting the common silicon enabling bits in feature/soc. If the individual bsp/* are still needed for some reason (mostly not), they can remain and pull from the common feature/soc files, minimizing duplication of data (and therefor bugs due to missing an update of one or the other BSPs). Does that help clarify the intent? -- Darren Hart Yocto Project - Linux Kernel Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ linux-yocto mailing list linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto