From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 33917E00AC8; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:24:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, * medium trust * [147.11.146.13 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] Received: from mail1.windriver.com (mail1.windriver.com [147.11.146.13]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E58DEE00995 for ; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:24:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.15.2/8.15.1) with ESMTPS id v3JGOCOr010995 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:24:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.local (128.224.20.183) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.294.0; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:24:12 -0700 To: "Paul D. DeRocco" , References: From: Bruce Ashfield Message-ID: <5f9b7995-771a-d9e2-3ceb-329569ee6e92@windriver.com> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 12:24:11 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Patch failures X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:24:26 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2017-04-17 2:18 AM, Paul D. DeRocco wrote: >> From: Bruce Ashfield [mailto:bruce.ashfield@windriver.com] >> >> I can't say from what you've provided why the BSP description isn't >> valid, but if the kernel recipe and layers are something I >> can look at, >> I can debug more. >> >> There were some changes between those releases that tweaked the kernel >> meta-data processing .. and that could be the issue, but >> again, I can't >> say without seeing all the details. > > I've attached a zip containing the stuff I've added. It also includes the > log file showing the patch errors. It also shows a log of a few thousand > identical errors from grub-efi, having to do with a 32 vs 64 mismatch. In > the past, my system has always booted via Syslinux, not Grub, so I don't > know what changed between Fido and Morty, or if Syslinux doesn't support > 64-bit booting. So there's another unrelated question. > I finally got a chance to look at the layers, and I can see that the processing code would in fact pick/generate a generic board description and that could lead you into the failures you are seeing. I assume you are building for MACHINE="chroma-bsp" and the linux-yocto-rt kernel recipe ? If you can confirm the details, and anything else, I can mock up a recipe space BSP description that should work. Bruce > The history is this: I originally developed this as a 32-bit OS under > Danny, then updated it with no problems to Fido. I wanted to try the x32 > ABI, since the extra registers could be very useful (lots of SSE SIMD in > the application). Perhaps I should have first tried updating to Morty > without x32. I had to change some version numbers (the kernel, systemd, > Samba), and of course add the x32 tune. For Samba, I added a few layers > from OE. >