[meta-ti] [PATCH] sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb: Update commit to pull in suspend/standby fix

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 12:41 PM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Cc: meta-ti at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb: Update
> commit to pull in suspend/standby fix
> 
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 09:56:28AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 6:50 PM
> > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > Cc: meta-ti at yoctoproject.org
> > > Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH] sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb:
> > > Update commit to pull in suspend/standby fix
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:27:38PM -0600, Franklin S. Cooper Jr wrote:
> > > > From: "Franklin S. Cooper Jr" <fcooper at ti.com>
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper at ti.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  .../linux/sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb          |    2 +-
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/recipes-kernel/linux/sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb
> > > > b/recipes-
> > > kernel/linux/sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb
> > > > index f9c4641..991f694 100644
> > > > --- a/recipes-kernel/linux/sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb
> > > > +++ b/recipes-kernel/linux/sitara-linux-ti-staging_3.14.bb
> > > > @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
> > > >
> > > >  BRANCH = "sitara-ti-linux-3.14.y"
> > > >
> > > > -SRCREV = "2d7148a3a95a2811604611f6c66a8826a61b8b12"
> > > > +SRCREV = "99b50bfb0f3fb0e43de31a6735989d31660b0835"
> > > >  PV = "3.14.26"
> > >
> > > No PV or PR bump? Are you sure?
> 
> > [Franklin] I still get confused by the "smarter" bitbake determining
> > when it needs to rebuild a recipe.
> 
> Well, bitbake is smart and it will rebuild the recipe if it changes.
> 
> 
> > Is the problem that all other kernel driver recipes still won't be
> > rebuilt even though bitbake may know to rebuild the kernel recipe?
> 
> The problem might be with out-of-tree kernel modules (graphics, cryptodev,
> etc.) and with the binary packages and the proper upgrade path (which you
> probably don't care for now), since package upgrade is handled by the
> package manager (opkg) and not bitbake. From opkg perspective, only the
> version and the revision matter and should be sorted properly, so if SRCREV
> is in PR, it may go lower (not in this case though) and won't get updated.
[Franklin] Thanks I keep forgetting that SRCREV can fluctuate so it's not good enough to "bump" the PR.
> 
> --
> Denys