[yocto] Problem with BSP supporting different machines

[Markus Hubig]

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 12:50:00PM -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Markus Hubig <mhubig at imko.de> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 03:10:36PM -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >> On 12-08-09 01:24 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >> >On 12-08-09 12:32 PM, Markus Hubig wrote:
> >> >>On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 10:48:30AM -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >> >>>On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Markus Hubig<mhubig at imko.de> wrote:
> >
> > Hmm just switching to the 1.3_M3 branch doesn't solve the warning, instead
> > the kernel build failed with error:
> >
> > | DEBUG: Executing shell function do_kernel_configme
> > | [INFO] doing kernel configme
> > | [INFO] Configuring target/machine combo: "standard/portuxg20"
> > | [INFO] collecting configs in ./meta/meta-series
> > |   [##################################################]  (completed in 4 seconds)
> > | ERROR: could not sanitize configuration fragments
> > |    errors are logged in meta/cfg/standard/portuxg20/config.log
> > | ERROR: Function failed: do_kernel_configme (see poky/build/tmp/work/\
> > |  portuxg20-poky-linux-gnueabi/linux-yocto-3.2.18+git1+ \
> > |  486f7aec824b4127e91ef53228823e996b3696f0_1+\
> > |  7cc31a952f78b8f8e8469eed93c23e9675a8eeb5-r4.0.1/temp/ \
> > |  log.do_kernel_configme.12375 for further information)
> >
> > I checked at meta/cfg/standard/portuxg20/config.log and found this:
> >
> > | ...
> > | [INFO] Sanitizing meta/cfg/kernel-cache/features/fuse/fuse.cfg
> > | [INFO] Sanitizing meta/cfg/kernel-cache/ktypes/standard/standard.cfg
> > | [INFO] Sanitizing meta/cfg/kernel-cache/cfg/devtmpfs.cfg
> > | [INFO] Sanitizing meta/cfg/kernel-cache/cfg/debugfs.cfg
> > | [INFO] Sanitizing meta/cfgportuxg20
> > | [ERROR] Kern frag  does not exist
> >
> > Hmm strange ... Now I cloned the tzanussi/yocto-bsp-master-update branch
> > from pocky-contrib (since I read the patch request from tzanussi on the ML)
> > and looked what his yocto-bsp script did.
> 
> That is interesting. I means something was detected as a configuration
> fragment ...

| [INFO] Sanitizing meta/cfgportuxg20
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
              Something get's crippled here!

> that wasn't, or didn't get migrated to the source tree. I can
> reproduce this with the layer that you provided before ?

Yes, but please pull bevor. I have two branches now 1.3_M3 and denzil.
I got this error with 1.3_M3 (both poky and my bsp) and linux 3.2 & 3.4.

> >
> > The main difference I spotted was in stamp9g20-standard.scc
> >
> > | define KMACHINE stamp9g20
> > | define KTYPE standard
> > | define KARCH arm
> > |
> > | include ktypes/standard
> > |-branch stamp9g20
> > |
> > | include stamp9g20.scc
> >
> > But removing the branch statement didn't change the error (on the 1.3_M3
> > branch) so I switched to using the shine new 3.4 kernel.
> >
> > But -> same error! OK maybe the 1.3_M3 is not that stable at all, so back
> > to denzil and 3.2. But with the branch statement removed ...
> 
> That really is strange, Tom and I have both tested this recently. I'll need to
> take another look.
>
> > Damn now I hit another strange error:
> >
> > | arm-poky-linux-gnueabi-ld: cannot find -lgcc
> > | make: *** [u-boot] Error 1
> > | ERROR: oe_runmake failed
> >
> > See https://bitbucket.org/imko/meta-stamp9g20/changeset/ebf8f19ea1932e1b6ed33e549023be44618481e7
> > for further details ...
> >
> > And the warnings 'still stays on' ...
> >
> >> If you were to use a completely new branch (versus the re-use), the
> >> warning would also go a way (versus my current suggestion of
> >> ignoring it).
> >
> > To do this I had to make some modification to my linux-yocto_3.2.bbappend
> > file, like this, right?
> >
> > |  COMPATIBLE_MACHINE_stamp9g20 = "stamp9g20"
> > | -KBRANCH_stamp9g20  = "standard/default/arm-versatile-926ejs"
> > | +KBRANCH_stamp9g20  = "standard/default/arm-versatile-926ejs/stamp9g20"
> > | +YOCTO_KERNEL_EXTERNAL_BRANCH_stamp9g20  = "standard/default/arm-versatile-926ejs/stamp9g20"
> > |  KMACHINE_stamp9g20  = "stamp9g20"
> >
> > But do I need to set a YOCTO_KERNEL_EXTERNAL_BRANCH_stamp9g20?
> 
> In 3.2 you would. I'm out of the office today, but you shouldn't still
> be seeing errors with master or with 3.2.
> 
> I'll do a complete build of your machine to see if bugs crept in.

Nice, Thanks!

Cheers, Markus