[oe] [RFC] ts72xx, ts73xx, ts74xx? How to handle properly similar machines

[Petr Štetiar]

Koen Kooi <k.kooi at student.utwente.nl> [2010-10-14 15:22:05]:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 14-10-10 14:45, Petr Štetiar wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I've been asked if I could add support for the ts7400 board/machine in the OE.
> > It's not a big deal, it's just an addition of one patch to the kernel recipe.
> > 
> > While I'll be into it, I was thinking about adding the base for the possible
> > future addition of ts7300[2] boards also. Althought I own only ts7800 and
> > ts7250, the ts7200[4], ts7300 and ts7400 families looks like they have a lot
> > of common and it would be possible to have for example one kernel for all of
> > them.
> > 
> > The question is, how to handle this correctly in OE? On the IRC, I was pointed
> > to the SOC_FAMILY[3], but it says "The use of SOC_FAMILY as an override is
> > currently a distribution or local setting", what does it mean?
> 
> It means you need to use angstrom or set is as override in local.conf

You mean setting it to something like a SOC_FAMILY = "ts7xxx"? And then do
something like this, from recipes/ti/ti-linuxutils.inc:

do_compile() {
    unset CFLAGS CPPFLAGS CXXFLAGS LDFLAGS

    case ${SOC_FAMILY} in
    dm365)
            modules="cmem edma irq";;
    omap3)
            modules="cmem sdma";;
        dm355)
            modules="cmem edma irq";;
    *)
            modules="cmem"
    esac

Well, I'm not OE/bitbake expert, but using something like
do_compile_append_SOC_FAMILY() would fit more in OE style for me. I can't find
any other usage of it. Anyway I think, that it would be abuse of SOC_FAMILY,
something like the SBC_FAMILY would be more apropriate, but again, I'm not OE
expert and I don't know what is possible.

-- ynezz