[EXT] config_default vs subtargets having their own config_<ver>?

[Andy Tang]

Hi Tim,

Thanks for doing this. 
I suggest to have config_<kver> for each subtargs in the subtarget dirs..

I have sent the patches for adding the imx8 platform.
But it can't be accepted due to the firmware issue.
Basically the DDR firmware for im8x was released by a self-extracted binary.
When extracted, customer need to accept the EULA which is not accepted by OpenWRT community.

Have you solved this problem?

BR,
Andy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Harvey <tharvey at gateworks.com>
> Sent: 2023年3月4日 8:20
> To: OpenWrt Development List <openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org>
> Cc: Piotr Dymacz <pepe2k at gmail.com>; Andy Tang <andy.tang at nxp.com>
> Subject: [EXT] config_default vs subtargets having their own config_<ver>?
> 
> Caution: EXT Email
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> I'm working on cortexa53 support for target/linux/imx for imx8 support and
> am not quite clear how best to take care of kernel config. There is a lot of
> differences in kernel config for
> cortexa7/cortexa9/cortexa53 with regards to IMX SoC's.
> 
> I see some targets have config_default files in the subtarget dirs and others
> have config_<kver>.
> 
> What is the recommended way of defining kernel config per subtarget and
> how is it recommended to come up with those split up config files?
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Tim