[OEDVM 2021] Better BSPs


Rich Persaud
 

https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/OEDVM_2021
> 1530 UTC on Zoom (link in the URL above)

In preparation for the BSP discussion at today's OEDVM, the following background material may be helpful.  Comments on BSP patterns, anti-patterns, incentives, constraints and other topics are welcome in this mailing list thread, so they can be organized ahead of the 30-minute session.

1.  "How to write a really good BSP layer" -- Chris Simmonds (Feb 2020)

2.  "State of BSPs" -- Beth Flanagan (Feb 2020)

3.  "Tips for Yocto BSPs" -- Cliff Brake & Khem Raj (Feb 2021)
  https://tmpdir.org/009/  (patterns & anti-patterns)

RESOURCES


MINUTES OF PRIOR OE DEVELOPER MEETINGS

NOV 2019 (LYON)

BSPs: carrot versus stick
14:20 Crofton: How many use vendor BSPs? (show of hands) ~30%
Andrey: Most fixes are not pushed back to the vendor BPSs.
Scott: AGL is not prepared to get input via the layers
Jan-Simon: That’s not really the case.
Richard: Would it help if the BSPs were Yocto compatible?
It should not change anything just when including the layer.
Consensus: that would help.
Mark H: Yocto compatibility is one part of the problem, the other is that the BSPs do not use the version of the kernel that he wants.
Jon: The vendors also do not support old kernel releases in the Ubuntu-variant images.
Mark A: They are also covering multiple boards with the same release, so the kernel is trailing.
Richard: The compatibility program has not been pushed as hard as it could.
Mark H: The layer index should show if a layer is Yocto Compatible.
It should also be stated clearly what kernel version the BSP layer supports.
Andrey: That would make it harder for the users.
Marek: These BSP are more like a tech demo.
Josef: They are also shipping arbitrary .bbappends.
Jan-Simon: They cannot enable all BSPs at once. Friendly layers would help. Isolation is key. If they ship libc-headers, it will break a package feed.
Richard: linux-libc-headers is just for building the libc, don’t use it for anything else.
Scott: Some vendors with the bad BSP are yocto project members.
William: The tools for checking compatibility have gotten a lot better.
Scott: Koen has been talking about this for years.
Richard: meta-oe doesn’t pass compatibility with Zeus right now.
Mark H: Wants to use the linux-yocto recipe, for fragments and moving to a different board.
Josef: There is a How to setup a BSP layer, and how to create a kernel recipe.
Paul: The documentation on how to build a clean BSP layer is not understandable by the usual BSP builders.
Mark H: The layerindex should show a checkmark for Yocto compatible layers.
Mikko: Some vendor BSPs are not public.
Mark H: Money speaks.
Jan: Many vendors say that their BSP is just for evaluation purposes.

OCT 2018 (EDINBURGH)

Ndec: setup Google Analytics on layers.openembedded.org (and probably openembedded.org)
Scott: we should run the existing checkers on known layers
Marco Cavallini: Are there rules to submitting layers to the index?
Some review, check that it’s reusable for other projects (yocto compatible)
Crofton recommends to run yocto-check-layer (especially BSP layers)
Richard: the layer-index can find problems easily which are not detected by check-layer
Mark Hatle: Machine and distro checking works well
Richard: check-layer uses the sstate checksums to verify that a layer affects only things that it should touch (machine/distro level) when enabled

Join openembedded-architecture@lists.openembedded.org to automatically receive all group messages.