From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail5.wrs.com (mail5.windriver.com [192.103.53.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7246C10F for ; Sun, 5 May 2019 10:31:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCB.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hcb.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.41]) by mail5.wrs.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x45AUkk4028343 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sun, 5 May 2019 03:30:56 -0700 Received: from localhost.corp.ad.wrs.com (128.224.162.182) by ALA-HCB.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Sun, 5 May 2019 03:30:23 -0700 To: Richard Purdie , Nicolas Dechesne , "Burton, Ross" References: <9f8a038abf7b7eff75038ccef5f066bfd37e58f5.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <0c45f88f-6056-2fa6-1db1-f7ce413ba0f3@windriver.com> <4659e72f46cee86b62be445fc267bf2fae4f78b4.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <0c43bc44-1cf4-af21-e4e4-ed7ef2cf0365@windriver.com> From: Robert Yang Message-ID: <90381831-a25e-921f-40eb-1fe96c633a78@windriver.com> Date: Sun, 5 May 2019 18:30:46 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0c43bc44-1cf4-af21-e4e4-ed7ef2cf0365@windriver.com> Cc: bitbake-devel Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] bitbake: build.py: check dependendent task for addtask X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussion that advance bitbake development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 May 2019 10:31:59 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi RP, After more investigations, these warnings are caused by recrdeptask, the rm_work calls: addtask after 'deps + recrdeptask' before do_build Then we will get the warnings, and we can divide these warnings into 3 kinds: 1) deltask only removes task from 'deps', but doesn't remove it from 'recrdeptask', so there are warnings for native recipes like dependent task do_package_write_rpm, although native.bbclass has called "deltask do_package_write_rpm', such a recrdeptask doesn't make any sense for native recipes. But we can't make deltask remove recrdeptask since we may need keep recrdeptask sometimes, for example, the image recipes don't need do_package_write_rpm, but their do_rootfs tasks require all the dependent rpms are done. I think that we need a command such as delrecrdeptask to fix it, but I'm not sure whether it is worth or not. 2) base.bbclass has set 'do_build[recrdeptask] += "do_deploy"', but do_deploy doesn't exist for most of the recipes, so we get the warnings of not do_deploy task, I don't know why do_deploy should be a recrdeptask, and maybe we need set it in rootfs_xxx.bbclass or image.bbclass, or set it conditionally in a func. 3) gcc-source doesn't have do_populate_sysroot or do_populate_lic, but do_build_without_rm_work always depends on them: bb.build.addtask('do_build_without_rm_work', '', ' '.join(deps), d) so we get warnings that gcc-source has no dependent task do_populate_sysroot or do_populate_lic. I think that we can make do_build_without_rm_work depend on them conditionally to fix the problem. Any comments are appreciated. // Robert On 5/5/19 1:56 PM, Robert Yang wrote: > > > On 5/2/19 3:42 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: >> On Wed, 2019-05-01 at 18:48 +0200, Nicolas Dechesne wrote: >>> On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:30 PM Burton, Ross >>> wrote: >>>> On Wed, 1 May 2019 at 11:51, Jacob Kroon >>>> wrote: >>>>> I'm getting a lot of these warnings after removing tmp/ and >>>>> rebuilding >>>>> my image from sstate cache. >>>>> FWIW I use rm_work.bbclass, and regularly use the >>>>> sstate-cache-management,sh script to prune old cache. >>>> >>>> There's a patch I hacked up in master-next that shows where these >>>> warnings are coming from.  Yes, this patch produces two warnings >>>> per >>>> recipe with rm_work enabled. >>> >>> argh... i hit the same issue and came up with the exact same >>> conclusion.. i should have checked the mailing list earlier today ;) >>> >>> I am getting thousands of warnings like that with rm_work. I had >>> modified bitbake so that it shows the 'task' name like Ross, in (). >> >> I suspect we're going to need to rethink that patch, and/or perhaps >> rm_work... > > > Sorry for the warnings, I just came back from the International Labour Day > Holiday. Something is wrong with rm_work, I will send a patch to fix it. > >> >> I did have concerns about it but was assured it was widely tested. We >> also probably need an rm_work test case on the autobuilder (need a bug >> for that so we don't forget?). > > Rather than add a testcae on autobuilder, how about add a testcase to > oe-selftest, please ? > > // Robert > >> >> Cheers, >> >> Richard >> >> >>