I like Nathan's suggestion for the text. Can someone explain to me though why emenlow is not a good example here? In the linux-yocto_3.14.bbappend file, KMACHINE_emenlow-noemgd is set equal to "emenlow". Isn't this equating emenlow-noemgd and emenlow? I am probably mis-understanding it so I could use some further explanation.
Thanks, Scott >-----Original Message----- >From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- >boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Rossi >Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 5:48 AM >To: Robert P. J. Day >Cc: Yocto discussion list >Subject: Re: [yocto] in kernel manual, should pick another example for >KMACHINE > >On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpj...@crashcourse.ca> >wrote: >> >> in section 3.2 of the kernel dev manual, there is a discussion of >> KMACHINE and how it is *typically* set to the same value as MACHINE, >> but there are cases where that might not be true; however, the example >> used to demonstrate this -- emenlow and emenlow-noemgd -- doesn't >seem >> appropriate as there is no "emenlow" machine definition file anymore >> in meta-intel. AFAICT, all of those non-noemgd machine definitions are >> gone. >> >> in all the layers i have checked out, the only layer where i see >> KMACHINE covering a number of MACHINE values is meta-xilinx >> (zynq-based machines). it sounds picky but, when demonstrating some >> concept, i think it's important that examples used actually exist in >> the code base in case people want to check. > >It comes around a bit due to the nature of different types of hardware. You >will find that amongst most of the meta-* bsp layers there exists two types of >MACHINE. You have the layers like meta-xilinx, meta-ti, etc which have >machines for each board. And then there are the layers like meta-intel which >have machines for each platform or SoC. There are a number of reasons for >each way. > >At least for Zynq, the kernel can (if you ignore that it has FPGA >logic) be configured and built the same way for all the boards with device >trees handling the differences. And as such the configuration is setup for the >SoC instead of the board. The reason that you actually see KMACHINE >differences in meta-xilinx is that the layer uses the linux-yocto build flow as >well as providing an in layer config cache for its targeted KMACHINE's. Which I >believe is rarely done in bsp layers that inherit linux-yocto for their >kernels (or >bbappend to linux-yocto). > >You could re-word the documentation to cover this case with something like: >"This variable is typically set to the same value as the MACHINE variable >however in some cases may instead refer to the underlying platform of the >MACHINE." > >Regards, >Nathan > >> >> rday >> >> -- >> >> >=========================================================== >============= >> Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA >> http://crashcourse.ca >> >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday >> LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday >> >=========================================================== >=========== >> == >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> yocto mailing list >> yocto@yoctoproject.org >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto >-- >_______________________________________________ >yocto mailing list >yocto@yoctoproject.org >https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
