[PATCH] ipq95xx: Add support for IPQ9574 RDP433

[Thibaut]

> Le 8 déc. 2023 à 16:39, Elliott Mitchell <ehem+openwrt at m5p.com> a écrit :
> 
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 11:14:38AM +0100, Robert Marko wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 11:13, Piotr Dymacz <pepe2k at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 8.12.2023 11:02, Robert Marko wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 11:01, Piotr Dymacz <pepe2k at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Would it make sense to rename qualcommax to qualcomm and make ipq95xx
>>>>> just another subtarget of it (I'm aware of A53 vs. A73)?
>>>> 
>>>> That depends on how much is shared between the AX SoC-s and the BE
>>>> ones(IPQ95xx and IPQ53xx).
>>> 
>>> I would say enough to keep them together.
>>> 
>>>> But, I would prefer that or qualcommbe target where new BE SoC-s will
>>>> be subtargets.
>>> 
>>> I'm personally more a fan of limiting number of top targets and deal
>>> with differences under subtargets.
>> 
>> Same here, better than to add more targets especially since a lot is shared.
> 
> This leads to needing more levels of organization.  Instead of simply
> TARGET/SUBTARGET, you end up needing TARGET/SUBTARGET/SUBSUBTARGET.  If
> this is going to be done, then the implementation should allow for an
> arbitrary number of levels.
> 
> A makefile fragment I created for testing:
> 
> foo := foo0
> SUBfoo := foo1
> SUBSUBfoo := foo2
> 
> define recur
> $(info current is $(1), value is $($(1))))
> ignore := $(if $(filter $(flavor SUB$(1)),undefined),,$(call recur,SUB$(1)))
> endef
> 
> ignore := $(call recur,foo)
> 
> all: test.make
> 	@true
> 
> So an arbitrary number of levels seems doable.

No.

>  Will mean rather
> substantial changes to the build system though.  I tend to favor this
> as the 2 level limitation is already placing restrictions on the scaling
> of the build count.

It appears most people do not understand that {sub}+targets use the exact same amount of build resources *each* as a whole target. There is no benefit, from the PoV of the (phase1) builders, to having more subtargets vs more targets: either way, growing either number indefinitely is simply not sustainable. Please don’t do that.

My 2c.

T.