1008809 - [Flame][NFC] libnfc-nci in external folder doesn't sync with libnfc-nci.so used in flame

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: NFC, defect)

Description

[Dimi Lee [:dimi]]

currently nfcd will include header file from external/libnfc-nci which is downloaded from https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/libnfc-nci

But in flame we should use T2M modified libnfc-nci otherwise header file and libnfc-nci.so will not match

Comment 1

[Wesley Huang [:wesley_huang] (EPM) (NI me)]

ni? Viral for Flame image issue.

Comment 2

[viral [:viralwang]]

Attachment: remove libnfc-nci.so from extract files

Comment 3

[viral [:viralwang]]

Attachment: build libnfc-nci from partner code

Comment 4

[Ken Chang[:kenkai]]

Viral is working on this.

Comment 5

[Michael Wu [:mwu]]

We need git.mozilla.org mirrors if we want to do this.

Is modifying libnfc-nci headers expected? I expected some sort of interface to protect us from implementation specific details..

Comment 6

[Dimi Lee [:dimi]]

(In reply to Michael Wu [:mwu] from comment #5)
> We need git.mozilla.org mirrors if we want to do this.
> 
> Is modifying libnfc-nci headers expected? I expected some sort of interface
> to protect us from implementation specific details..

Yes, I think the header files of libnfc-nci are different is reasonable for this case. Flame use NXP chipset and it is compatible with NCI protocol. The header files provide not only API but also pre-defined value or structure which may vary according to different hardware chipset (NXP, broadcom).

Comment 7

[Michael Wu [:mwu]]

Comment on attachment 8426088 [details] [review]
build libnfc-nci from partner code

As usual, please make sure there's a git.mozilla.org mirror before merging this. Also, I think there's another pull request which adds this remote, so things may conflict.

Comment 8

[viral [:viralwang]]

Hi Michael,

For libnfc-nci, we don't have plan to modify the code in our side.
I think we can use partner's repo to reduce our maintin effort.

I also list the difference in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1018871#c11
we can know the commits added in partner's github

May I have your suggestion that why we should have a mirror in git.mozilla.org if we won't send any PR?
Thanks :)

Comment 9

[Michael Wu [:mwu]]

You need it because tbpl builds may break if you don't have a mirror. The build automation doesn't use repos that don't have remotes on git.mozilla.org.

Comment 10

[thomas tsai]

libnfc-nci from caf can't work but it works from oem partner repo. If a mirror of oem repo in git.mozilla.org is necessary, who will sync and solve the conflicts in the future? Is libnfc-nci the only one mirrored repo? Or how many repos are necessarily mirrored from oem repos?

Comment 11

[thomas tsai]

I know what's going on about tbpl mirror now.

Comment 12

[thomas tsai]

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=994521

Comment 13

[Wesley Huang [:wesley_huang] (EPM) (NI me)]

Hi Viral,
I'm setting the target milestone to Sprint4 (before June20) because we are going to have NFC workshop which happens in the week of June23. I hope we'll be able to use Flame to showcase tap2pay scenario for partners at that time.

Comment 14

[:gerard-majax]

Viral, it seems we only need that you get a mirror for this repo to land this code. Is everything on track ?

Comment 15

[viral [:viralwang]]

Partner provide latest rom (v10H) this week and also push updated code to github.
I will check the change again and see if there's any other repo need mirrored.
Thanks :)

Comment 16

[viral [:viralwang]]

we already have a mirrored repository in bug 1024403.

Comment 17

[Wesley Huang [:wesley_huang] (EPM) (NI me)]

2.0+ will be uplifted automatically, right?

Comment 18

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

device-flame/master: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/device-flame/commit/33faca8033c6f8cda0c383ab40d69c7a45e6db38

b2g-manifest/master: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/b2g-manifest/commit/868db7b6cf8675378392a3c74c4bb592ac63c69f

(In reply to Wesley Huang [:wesley_huang] from comment #17)
> 2.0+ will be uplifted automatically, right?

Yes, once it's confirmed to have stuck on master.

Comment 19

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

device-flame/v2.0: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/device-flame/commit/617e4eea4c3677eb3d2aa2d8aa34d9a790e55159

b2g-manifest/v2.0: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/b2g-manifest/commit/06e7fa6793d836cf5fdf7009092882a11c0cf5c5

My only concern is that we're now building Flame on v2.0 against the tip revision of the foxfone-one branch, when we're specifically trying to avoid that on the release branches.