qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support

PATCH Superseded Jonathan Liu 5 participants 12 messages Oct 25, 2015 – Oct 26, 2015

lore

Share & tools

lore

Jonathan Liu

author

2015-10-25 22:44 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH v2 1/1 qtbase: enable Raspberry Pi support

[Support #16]

Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>

---
 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend

recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0

new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3e5e667
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}

Signature · 1 line

2.6.1

Paul Eggleton

2015-10-26 08:08 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 14 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:

[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667

recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6

Quoted 6 lines

recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}

I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Jonathan Liu

author

2015-10-26 08:25 UTC #2 lore raw

Quoted 25 lines · Paul Eggleton

Quoted 14 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:
[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
  recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6
Quoted 6 lines
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}
I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?

Quoted 3 lines

Cheers,
Paul

It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry Pi support for other machines.
I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g. https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend).

Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this?

Regards,
Jonathan

Otavio Salvador

2015-10-26 11:28 UTC #3 lore raw

Quoted 7 lines · Jonathan Liu

On 26/10/2015 7:08 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry Pi support for other machines.
I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g.
https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend).
Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this?

We handle this moving it to a SoC subarch and using a dynamic package arch handler to put every package depending on it as a subarch as well. Ideally we could split the QPA module and build it separated. No clue if it is possible or not.

Signature · 3 lines

Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750

Jonathan Liu

author

2015-10-26 11:32 UTC #4 lore raw

Quoted 7 lines · Otavio Salvador

Quoted 6 lines · Jonathan Liu
On 26/10/2015 7:08 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry Pi support for other machines.
I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g.
https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend).

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line
Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this?
We handle this moving it to a SoC subarch and using a dynamic package arch handler to put every package depending on it as a subarch as well. Ideally we could split the QPA module and build it separated. No clue if it is possible or not.

So for meta-fsl-arm, would only the qtbase-plugins package be using machine-specific arch and the other qtbase packages be using non-machine-specific arch? Or is it done on a per-recipe rather than per-package granularity?

Regards,
Jonathan

Otavio Salvador

2015-10-26 12:09 UTC #5 lore raw

Quoted 17 lines · Jonathan Liu

Quoted 7 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 6 lines · Jonathan Liu
On 26/10/2015 7:08 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
It would rebuild qtbase (and recipes depending on it) without Raspberry Pi
support for other machines.
I see similar machine-specific do_configure_prepend elsewhere (e.g.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-arm/blob/master/qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%25.bbappend).
Otavio, any thoughts on a better way to handle this?
We handle this moving it to a SoC subarch and using a dynamic package arch handler to put every package depending on it as a subarch as well. Ideally we could split the QPA module and build it separated. No clue if it is possible or not.

Quoted 4 lines

So for meta-fsl-arm, would only the qtbase-plugins package be using machine-specific arch and the other qtbase packages be using non-machine-specific arch?
Or is it done on a per-recipe rather than per-package granularity?

We have the handler, which allows for it to be done properly[1].

1. http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-fsl-arm/tree/conf/machine/include/imx-base.inc#n68

Including 'qtbase' here will make it to move all packages depending on it for the subarch.

The real long term solution is to try to split it and make the QPA package machine specific. I don't know if it is possible.

Signature · 3 lines

Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750

Andrei Gherzan

2015-10-26 09:15 UTC #6 lore raw

In reply to Paul Eggleton

Hi Paul,

Quoted 9 lines · Paul Eggleton

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:
[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend

Quoted 17 lines

recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6
Quoted 12 lines
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}
I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?

But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other machines?

--
Andrei Gherzan

Paul Eggleton

2015-10-26 09:41 UTC #7 lore raw

Quoted 30 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote:

Hi Paul,
Quoted 10 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 9 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:
[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend
Quoted 16 lines
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6
Quoted 12 lines
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}
I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?

Quoted 2 lines

But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other machines?

If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as machine- specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is possibly more of an issue).

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Jonathan Liu

author

2015-10-26 10:48 UTC #8 lore raw

Quoted 38 lines · Paul Eggleton

Quoted 28 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote:
Hi Paul,
Quoted 10 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 9 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:
[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
  recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend
Quoted 15 lines
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6
Quoted 12 lines
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}
I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?
Quoted 2 lines
But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other machines?
If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as machine- specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is possibly more of an issue).

Quoted 3 lines

Cheers,
Paul

Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 to fix this.

Regards,
Jonathan

Paul Eggleton

2015-10-26 10:56 UTC #9 lore raw

Quoted 44 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 21:48:24 Jonathan Liu wrote:

Quoted 43 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 30 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote:
Hi Paul,
Quoted 10 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 9 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:
[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
  recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend
Quoted 16 lines
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6
Quoted 12 lines
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}
I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?
Quoted 3 lines
But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other
machines?
If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as machine-
specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is possibly more of an issue).

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Cheers,
Paul
Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 to fix this.

I think that will get taken care of automatically by virtue of the machine- specific override. My question is more about:

1) Will that mechanism entirely work, including desired behaviours in both the build system and the package manager, and

2) Are any side-effects worth it?

Cheers,
Paul

Signature · 2 lines

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Jonathan Liu

author

2015-10-26 11:10 UTC #10 lore raw

Quoted 49 lines · Paul Eggleton

Quoted 41 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 21:48:24 Jonathan Liu wrote:
Quoted 40 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 28 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote:
Hi Paul,
Quoted 10 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 9 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:
[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
   recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend
Quoted 15 lines
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6
Quoted 12 lines
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}
I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?
Quoted 3 lines
But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other
machines?
If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as machine-
specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is possibly more of an issue).
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Cheers,
Paul
Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 to fix this.
I think that will get taken care of automatically by virtue of the machine- specific override. My question is more about:

Quoted 8 lines

1) Will that mechanism entirely work, including desired behaviours in both the build system and the package manager, and
2) Are any side-effects worth it?
Cheers,
Paul

It wasn't automatically taken care of. I checked the package architecture and it was incorrect with the v2 patch.
The machine-specific architecture has a higher priority (from my reading of the opkg handling) so opkg at least should prefer it if a more generic architecture package is also present. I haven't tested it thoroughly though.

It seems worth it to have OpenGL ES graphics acceleration.

Regards,
Jonathan

Martin Jansa

2015-10-26 11:45 UTC #11 lore raw

In reply to Paul Eggleton

Quoted 45 lines · Paul Eggleton

Quoted 44 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 21:48:24 Jonathan Liu wrote:
Quoted 43 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 30 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 10:15:49 Andrei Gherzan wrote:
Hi Paul,
Quoted 10 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 9 lines · On Monday 26 October 2015 09:43:08 Jonathan Liu wrote:
[Support #16]
Signed-off-by Jonathan Liu <[email protected]>
---
  recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend | 6 ++++++
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend
Quoted 16 lines
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend line 6
Quoted 12 lines
(quoted diff) +0 -0
b/recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e5e667
recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_%.bbappend new file +6 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+do_configure_prepend_rpi() {
+    cat > ${S}/mkspecs/oe-device-extra.pri << 'EOF'
+EGLFS_DEVICE_INTEGRATION = eglfs_brcm
+QMAKE_LIBS_EGL = -lEGL -lGLESv2
+EOF
+}
I'm wondering if this is a good idea or not. I appreciate the intention, but does bbappending non-machine-specific recipes like this play well when you have other machines enabled in the same distro?
Quoted 3 lines
But this change will be applied only for _rpi. How is this affecting other
machines?
If everything works such that the resulting packages get marked as machine-
specific and the package manager correctly installs them in preference to the generic architecture packages on the machines in question, then there won't be a massive problem (though the side-effect is probably that any recipes depending on qtbase will also become machine-specific, that is possibly more of an issue).

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Cheers,
Paul
Good point. The package arch needs to machine-specific. I will send a v3 to fix this.
I think that will get taken care of automatically by virtue of the machine- specific override. My question is more about:

machine-specific override to set PACKAGE_ARCH works only when it's used as subdirectory in SRC_URI, doesn't it? And it sets it only for qtbase, not all other recipes which depend on qtbase (see my other reply in this thread).

Quoted 17 lines

1) Will that mechanism entirely work, including desired behaviours in both the build system and the package manager, and
2) Are any side-effects worth it?
Cheers,
Paul
Signature · 7 lines
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
-- 
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Signature · 1 line

Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: [email protected]