From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com (mail-wm0-f68.google.com [74.125.82.68]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98FA9771F0 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 15:26:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f68.google.com with SMTP id a6so14133632wmc.2 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:26:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Pcnf12epIdlqEgKbvLIE1GO2sd58VpFAR5EZRszE79o=; b=Cllg+MsEhYJBXnRN1L2E52/uFXq1WOVCUbxsTB19KC862kMcG7awwMK/KFBLreSp1W cdNIf+TslBP7kagr16UJDxVceGnORz8C5paB/HMs8VAnW8CeJqRQXjv3iZtPIoHmGtz1 EX1xQfssMi5Xp8t/88pW3pQvQdGFcyTvJgIr4JikYIzrh6tenUh7RGkoARg1xS6KRSKx yF5cFddhH/F6u+GZTZk0/Ejna8xYGI+5JU5yUd1pP5exX/u5652RnnIpkiN/IzjrOjh8 6ANz6oGcfm+SUq/ZELp7NluVT7JyI6uRgMCwICeNH6GFWaTAmbH60p4c8zHZAZ2kmA3s vIqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwMbs9sSvb8yRRswDaoK5U2zDf9U+mRyq5ATgSiGlqFg9N1gDti9AMhSMMQI9l3Wuw== X-Received: by 10.194.112.233 with SMTP id it9mr15165593wjb.176.1473693989772; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:26:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tfsielt31850 ([77.107.218.170]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a18sm764350wma.5.2016.09.12.08.26.28 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:26:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1473693988.22823.1.camel@andred.net> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9?= Draszik To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:26:28 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20160905083442.27787-1-git@andred.net> References: <20160905083442.27787-1-git@andred.net> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] image.bbclass: do not check size of the debugfs image X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 15:26:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ping On Mo, 2016-09-05 at 09:34 +0100, André Draszik wrote: > The debugfs is supposed to be used in addition to the > normal image for debugging purposes, it doesn't make > sense to artificially limit its maximum size. > > Signed-off-by: André Draszik > --- >  meta/classes/image.bbclass | 6 ++++++ >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/meta/classes/image.bbclass b/meta/classes/image.bbclass > index 07bd2d6..cb7d06d 100644 > --- a/meta/classes/image.bbclass > +++ b/meta/classes/image.bbclass > @@ -538,6 +538,12 @@ def get_rootfs_size(d): >      base_size += rootfs_alignment - 1 >      base_size -= base_size % rootfs_alignment >   > +    # Do not check image size of the debugfs image. This is not supposed > +    # to be deployed, etc. so it doesn't make sense to limit the size > +    # of the debug. > +    if (d.getVar('IMAGE_BUILDING_DEBUGFS', True) or "") == "true": > +        return base_size > + >      # Check the rootfs size against IMAGE_ROOTFS_MAXSIZE (if set) >      if rootfs_maxsize: >          rootfs_maxsize_int = int(rootfs_maxsize)