Hi Frans and Felix,
On 2019-07-09 11:56 AM, Felix Held wrote:
> Hi Frans!
>> Proposal is creating a COM directory ‘src/com’ where the module
>> manufacturer and module name are used. (Similar to mainboard).
>> In this src/com directory common module support is placed.
>> mainboard will use this COM module and contains the ‘variant’ code.
> Sounds like a good idea to me; I wouldn't call the directory src/com
> though since my first association with that name would be some sort of
> communication device support. Maybe src/som (system on module)?
Technically a SOM/COM wont work at all without a carrier board.
The configuration (devicetree.cb) heavily depends on the carrier board,
but on the
other hand the GPIO configuration is likely SOM specific.
I guess it's a good idea to put *non mainboard-specific* code in src/som
On the other hand as already said the variant scheme works quite well.
> I think I talked with Nico and siro on that some months ago on IRC, so
> it would be good if they could also comment on this.
> I think the other option we talked about was having the module as a
> base and the official carrier board as mainboard variant and then use
> the module code in a mainboard with the vendor being the vendor of the
> carrier module which is a variant of the other mainboard code.
> Putting this into a separate directory is probably the cleaner option
> If the variants approach works well for that, I'd like to keep using
> that and not introducing some new infrastructure; if that causes some
> major pain, it might also be worth investigating how to improve things
If we decide to go either way the documentation should be updated to
explain this decision.