On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 2:28 PM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > > 22/01/2021 09:39, Juraj Linkeš: > > > > > > disabled drivers, similarly how the command line option works and > > > > > > remove unneeded driver options ported from the old makefile > > > > > > system, since they don't work in the current Meson build system. > > > > > > Add support for removing drivers for cross builds so that we can > > > > > > disable them in cross files. > > > > > > > > > > Why disabling them? > > > > > If a driver is not supported it should disable itseld in its meson > > > > > file. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is helpful when building for an SoC where we don't want to build > > > > to build a driver, but the build machine actually supports the driver. > > > > I believe in this case the meson build system would find the > > > > dependencies and designate the driver to be build, but we don't want to > > > > build > > > the driver for that SoC. > > > > > > > > There may be other reasons as well - Honnappa or others from the Arm > > > > community may shed more light on this. > > > IMO, the assumption should be everything compiles on all the platforms. > > > Hence, > > > the disables should be applied to the platforms where the drivers do not > > > compile. > > If a driver does not compile, it can disable itself. > No need for a configuration. > > > Would it be okay to leave the disabled as they're in this commit and leave > > the updates to the plaform owners? Thomas, what do you think? > > I think this patch should not disable drivers but just add the infra to do it.
IMO, If the SOC has "fixed" set of dpdk devices, probably better to have positive logic to enable only those in config file. I think, that will be portable and useful. IMO, We can have infrastructure code enable only specific drivers and config owners can later enable the required set. > >
