[RFC PATCH 2/2] configs: Add am62x_beagleplay_* defconfigs

[Andrew Davis]

On 8/30/23 7:31 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 17:14-20230829, Andrew Davis wrote:
>> Add am62x_beagleplay_r5_defconfig for R5 SPL and
>> am62x_beagleplay_a53_defconfig for A53 SPL and U-Boot support.
>>
>> These defconfigs are composite defconfigs built from the config fragment
>> board/ti/am62x/beagleplay_*.config applied onto the base
>> am62x_evm_*_defconfig.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd at ti.com>
>> ---
>>   configs/am62x_beagleplay_a53_defconfig | 3 +++
>>   configs/am62x_beagleplay_r5_defconfig  | 3 +++
>>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 configs/am62x_beagleplay_a53_defconfig
>>   create mode 100644 configs/am62x_beagleplay_r5_defconfig
>>
>> diff --git a/configs/am62x_beagleplay_a53_defconfig b/configs/am62x_beagleplay_a53_defconfig
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000000..ad708e15397
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/configs/am62x_beagleplay_a53_defconfig
>> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
>> +// The BeaglePlay defconfig for A53 core
>> +#include "configs/am62x_evm_a53_defconfig"
>> +#include "board/ti/am62x/beagleplay_a53.config"
>> diff --git a/configs/am62x_beagleplay_r5_defconfig b/configs/am62x_beagleplay_r5_defconfig
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000000..276b1f81a3e
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/configs/am62x_beagleplay_r5_defconfig
>> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
>> +// The BeaglePlay defconfig for R5 core
>> +#include "configs/am62x_evm_r5_defconfig"
>> +#include "board/ti/am62x/beagleplay_r5.config"
>> -- 
>> 2.39.2
>>
> 
> my only complaint is that if we add lets say
> board/ti/am62x/dfu.config, Then:
> 
> R5:
> 1. am62x_evm_r5_defconfig = am62x_evm_r5_defconfig
> 2. am62x_beagleplay_r5_defconfig = am62x_evm_r5_defconfig + beagleplay_r5.config
> 3. am62x_evm_r5_dfu_defconfig = am62x_evm_r5_defconfig + dfu.config
> 4. am62x_beagleplay_r5_dfu_defconfig = am62x_evm_r5_defconfig + beagleplay_r5.config + dfu.config
> 
> This information can be in a single txt file Rather than have a
> defconfig file for each combination.
> 

Having every combination in a text file vs in a directory of files doesn't
seem like much difference to me. `cat combinations.txt` vs `ls -l configs/`.
But using a file would mean extra tooling and non-standard usage.

Let's simply try to avoid these combinatorial problems by avoiding adding
too many fragments that apply broadly. That adds testing burden. When features
need added/removed, folks can use menuconfig or similar. We shouldn't need a
defconfig fragment for DFU..

Andrew