From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lb0-f196.google.com (mail-lb0-f196.google.com [209.85.217.196]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9024071E63 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:57:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lb0-f196.google.com with SMTP id bc4so26659951lbc.0 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:57:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=33Jb4cRTuRk59oME84bQ1Z/sCvhB4xNSHjI6o2XAo2I=; b=sfxENis3uUj8KsHVSLOg7zZLUsDO/3MGLlqT5bIYkJ+23hLRKQ3lKWyWWpWy2BVeBf 3JlasnhVHWQIjD2uzcF8ak0s4HPyYpQoX94Z2Tx9RlzvCMr/7M4CXDabSs0SRKdHxyTn azJ7gJtR8zq94k6+4+YWqbtPYj8wAwbpT5HdLFV3lBzXLR67k41fSqJ1rGeNj4wOzFBy K1rXuBeaST5nRKjCcv9bW+1SgnIkCQZp6ig+A5Ytykypz36fWL4+xPaAF0Q3C7jVOs4v QtrsWFGw+1xRTk4UTgm0VgutxN5K1Xy2yqFieEv66QJdnr4NUYIu3yxA4uq+5lgNTY7U o0CQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=33Jb4cRTuRk59oME84bQ1Z/sCvhB4xNSHjI6o2XAo2I=; b=CjFrF6ISj8szSvXz8xqqFbXygEVmjGGt3UOnXPVxqAWjJJCE1O/gLv8CYpqfrp4eTF JWcp0kbP7KlOQqAo//R6+0lh1LUe0Z/NbBuWVVhyXwH4dO+E3BnZ+fPPY5IH71334cF+ IOczs636knM0XVP4pB2JVXDC/p/PWrfj6KNKY0XnmTbEd5BSj/PzZs+ORfbJM7eeLR9z +12B6Z8dRtEzl3yGRny0RDJiFhuTAE7F7vUm48FvBkqoNl5RKVlAJtO0TY8ZCnum0rie ZYtMqt+/nG67sV4c/BRSdMp8WZqsjjMguLScGkqEtP8dY9wAp5nRizQ6vuZMJqINtvg1 lAKA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm07w7pkvlzfFofqXY1bKtJYkwyjiIqp4L6C44b3dSmi8KctsbhCv4F1/kLKw9LDrAlMLlZT87eE+RNz3nbYMonIN38uQ== X-Received: by 10.112.166.33 with SMTP id zd1mr11319252lbb.71.1453240670198; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:57:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.12] (c80-217-62-231.bredband.comhem.se. [80.217.62.231]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l204sm4290172lfg.49.2016.01.19.13.57.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:57:49 -0800 (PST) To: Bruce Ashfield , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <1451999565-3502-1-git-send-email-liu.ming50@gmail.com> <1451999565-3502-2-git-send-email-liu.ming50@gmail.com> <569E90F9.6020806@windriver.com> From: Ming Liu Message-ID: <569EB15C.9040502@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:57:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <569E90F9.6020806@windriver.com> Cc: yue.tao@windriver.com, Ming Liu Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kernel.bbclass: do not install initramfs bundled kernel 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: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:57:52 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/19/2016 08:39 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On 16-01-05 08:12 AM, Ming Liu wrote: >> From: Ming Liu >> >> It makes no sense to install a initramfs bundled kernel image since >> do_package does not depend on do_bundle_initramfs at all, otherwise, it >> leads to a implicit kernel-image package depending on do_package run >> before >> or after do_bundle_initramfs. > > Again. So why not just add the ordering in the task dependencies ? If we add a intertask dependency like: add bundle_initramfs before do_install after do_deploy do_package Then it will somehow introduce a circular dependency as I described in another mail. > > I'm probably missing something, which just means we need to tweak > the commit log a bit more. Maybe I should add some description in commit log about why I think we could not introduce a intertask dependency as a fix. > > The code you are removing is conditional, and is run after an > explicit kernel_do_compile is called, to rebuild the existing > kernel configuration with an embedded initramfs (via alternate initrd). > So outside of some ordering/parallel execution issues, I'm not seeing > it as broken. Yes, I agree, it will not break the kernel re-compiling, the problem I want to fix here is just that it does not provide a certain way that we could add initramfs bundled kernel image into a rootfs. //Ming Liu > > Bruce > >> >> Signed-off-by: Ming Liu >> --- >> meta/classes/kernel.bbclass | 4 ---- >> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass >> index 4ce1611..d1ca614 100644 >> --- a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass >> +++ b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass >> @@ -179,10 +179,6 @@ do_bundle_initramfs () { >> kernel_do_compile >> mv -f ${KERNEL_OUTPUT} ${KERNEL_OUTPUT}.initramfs >> mv -f ${KERNEL_OUTPUT}.bak ${KERNEL_OUTPUT} >> - # Update install area >> - echo "There is kernel image bundled with initramfs: >> ${B}/${KERNEL_OUTPUT}.initramfs" >> - install -m 0644 ${B}/${KERNEL_OUTPUT}.initramfs >> ${D}/boot/${KERNEL_IMAGETYPE}-initramfs-${MACHINE}.bin >> - echo "${B}/${KERNEL_OUTPUT}.initramfs" >> fi >> } >> >> >