[meta-intel] [PATCH 21/31] machinesetuptool: a new recipe for setup of a machine

[Darren Hart]

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 01:17:09PM -0500, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 12:14 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote:
> > 
> > On 9/19/14, 9:41 AM, "Zanussi, Tom" <tom.zanussi at intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > >On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 11:31 -0500, Kamble, Nitin A wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> On 9/19/14, 6:52 AM, "Zanussi, Tom" <tom.zanussi at intel.com> wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> >On Thu, 2014-09-18 at 17:35 -0700, nitin.a.kamble at intel.com wrote:
> > >> >> From: Nitin A Kamble <nitin.a.kamble at intel.com>
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> This recipe adds ability to setup a BSP image for a specific machine
> > >>or
> > >> >> platform at the boot time. The base recipe does not provide any
> > >>machine
> > >> >> configuration files, and the required machine configuration files are
> > >> >> to be provided in the BSP layers.
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> This recipe is currently split in 2 files for ease of future
> > >>migration
> > >> >>of
> > >> >> the base recipe to the oecore layer.
> > >> >> 
> > >> >
> > >> >This seems like fairly significant new functionality to go in
> > >>completely
> > >> >undocumented.  I'd expect to see at least something that explains the
> > >> >basics of what it is, how it works, why it's needed, what functionality
> > >> >it's meant to replace, and especially how users are supposed to use it
> > >> >and what the interface is.
> > >> 
> > >> Yes, Documentation is pending, but before I go there, I would like to
> > >>get
> > >> the code in so that the interfaces are officially finalized.
> > >
> > >Well, documentation will be needed in any case, and it really helps to
> > >give reviewers an idea of what they're looking at, rather than having
> > >them waste time trying to puzzle out the interfaces and intentions.
> > >
> > >I'm guessing that any documentation you'd create now wouldn't have to be
> > >completely rewritten, so it shouldn't be too onerous a task to update
> > >those along with any code changes.
> > 
> > Ok, And where should this documentation go? Some of it I have included in
> > the sources of the machinesetuptool itself. Some sample configuration is
> > also included in the code repository. I can create a new file names
> > README.machinesetuptool in the top directory of meta-intel layer. Will
> > that work?
> > 
> 
> Hmm, so with these two patchsets, this and the microcode feature, we're
> talking about adding README.*.  Sounds like it might make more sense to
> have a Documentation/ directory along the lines of the kernel
> Documentation/ directory for text files on various subjects...

Yeah, it might be time for that. For the time being, a blurb in the common
README should be sufficient with a Documentation/ project being a separate
effort.

--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center