[PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Adrian Alonso]

Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
---
 conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
index feca186..0c41db4 100644
--- a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
+++ b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
 TARGET_CC_ARCH = "-mcpu=440"
 BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "ppc440"
 FEED_ARCH = "ppc440"
-PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
+PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440 ppc440e"
-- 
1.6.6

[PATCH 2/4] xilinx-ml507.conf: new config for xilinx ml507 devboard

[Adrian Alonso]

Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
---
 conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf |   33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf

diff --git a/conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf b/conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6194469
--- /dev/null
+++ b/conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+# Copyright (C) 2010, Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
+# Released under the MIT license (see packages/COPYING)
+#@TYPE: Machine
+#@Name: Xilinx ML507 FPGA Development Platform
+#@DESCRIPTION: Machine configuration for Xilinx ML507
+
+TARGET_ARCH = "powerpc"
+TARGET_CPU = "440"
+TARGET_FPU = "soft"
+#tune for the 440 cpu
+require conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
+
+#ASSUME_PROVIDED += "virtual/kernel"
+PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel = "linux"
+
+KERNEL_IMAGETYPE = "uImage"
+
+MACHINE_FEATURES = "kernel26 ext2 usbhost udev"
+MACHINE_EXTRA_RECOMMENDS = "kernel-modules"
+
+UBOOT_ARCH = "ppc"
+UBOOT_MACHINE = "ml507_defconfig"
+
+# Xilinx EDK override hardware  definitions for xilinx-bsp
+# Include in your local.conf
+# XILINX_BSP_PATH = "complete path for Xilinx XPS project"
+# XILINX_BOARD = "ml507"
+
+# Don't use tty1
+USE_VT = "0"
+SERIAL_CONSOLE = "9600 ttyS0"
+
+
-- 
1.6.6

[PATCH 3/4] linux.inc: add device tree for xilinx ml507

[Adrian Alonso]

Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
---
 recipes/linux/linux.inc |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/recipes/linux/linux.inc b/recipes/linux/linux.inc
index 7405c08..b562657 100644
--- a/recipes/linux/linux.inc
+++ b/recipes/linux/linux.inc
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ KERNEL_DEVICETREE_mpc8313e-rdb = "arch/${ARCH}/boot/dts/mpc8313erdb.dts"
 KERNEL_DEVICETREE_mpc8315e-rdb = "arch/${ARCH}/boot/dts/mpc8315erdb.dts"
 KERNEL_DEVICETREE_mpc8323e-rdb = "arch/${ARCH}/boot/dts/mpc832x_rdb.dts"
 KERNEL_DEVICETREE_sequoia = "arch/${ARCH}/boot/dts/sequoia.dts"
+KERNEL_DEVICETREE_xilinx-ml507 = "arch/${ARCH}/boot/dts/virtex440-ml507.dts"
 
 KERNEL_DEVICETREE_FLAGS = "-R 8 -S 0x3000"
 
-- 
1.6.6

[PATCH 4/4] xilinx-bsp.bbclass: add support for xilinx ml507

[Adrian Alonso]

Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
---
 classes/xilinx-bsp.bbclass |   56 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/classes/xilinx-bsp.bbclass b/classes/xilinx-bsp.bbclass
index f657e5b..c719b3b 100644
--- a/classes/xilinx-bsp.bbclass
+++ b/classes/xilinx-bsp.bbclass
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 #
 #This class handles all the intricasies of getting the required files from the 
 #ISE/EDK/project to the kernel and prepare the kernel for compilation.
-#The Xilinx EDK supports 2 different architectures : PowerPC (ppc 405) and Microblaze
+#The Xilinx EDK supports 2 different architectures : PowerPC (ppc 405,440) and Microblaze
 #Only the PowerPC BSP has been tested so far
 #For this to work correctly you need to add XILINX_BSP_PATH and XILINX_BOARD to your 
 #local.conf
@@ -12,42 +12,40 @@
 #
 #Currently supported boards
 #Xilinx ML403
+#Xilinx ML507
 #More to come soon ;)
 
 do_configure_prepend() {
 
-
 #first check that the XILINX_BSP_PATH and XILINX_BOARD have been defined in local.conf
-if [ -z "${XILINX_BSP_PATH}" ]; then
-   oefatal "XILINX_BSP_PATH not defined ! Exiting..."
-   exit 1
-
-else
-   if [ -z "${XILINX_BOARD}" ]; then
-      oefatal "XILINX_BOARD not defined ! Exiting"
-      exit 1
-   fi
-
-fi
 #now depending on the board type and arch do what is nessesary
 
-case "${XILINX_BOARD}" in
-     ML403)
-        oenote "ML403 board setup"
-        cp -pPR ${XILINX_BSP_PATH}/ppc405_0/libsrc/linux_2_6_v1_00_a/linux/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/xparameters/xparameters_ml40x.h \
+if [ -n "${XILINX_BSP_PATH}" ]; then
+	case "${XILINX_BOARD}" in
+		ml403 | ML403)
+			oenote "ML403 board setup"
+			cp -pPR ${XILINX_BSP_PATH}/ppc405_0/libsrc/linux_2_6_v1_00_a/linux/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/xparameters/xparameters_ml40x.h \
                 ${S}/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/xparameters/xparameters_ml403.h
-     ;;
-
-     *    ) 
-      oefatal "! Unknow Xilinx board ! Exiting..."
-      exit 1
-     ;;
-esac               
-
+		;;
+		ml507 | ML507)
+			oenote "Xilinx ML507 board setup"
+			dts=`find "${XILINX_BSP_PATH}" -name *.dts -print`
+			if [ -n "$dts" ]; then
+				oenote "Replacing device tree with ${dts}"
+				cp -pP ${dts} ${S}/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/virtex440-ml507.dts
+			else
+				oenote "Device tree not found in project dir"
+			fi
+		;;
+		*) 
+			oefatal "! Unknow Xilinx board ! Exit ..."
+			exit 1
+		;;
+	esac               
+else
+	oefatal "XILINX_BSP_PATH not defined ! Exit"
+	exit 1
+fi
 
 }
 
-
-
-
-
-- 
1.6.6

Re: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 10:32, Adrian Alonso wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>

Acked-by: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@datenfreihafen.org>

I've compile tested all four patches here and they work fine. Before applying
I would like to get an ACK from one of our PowerPC guys.

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: [PATCH 2/4] xilinx-ml507.conf: new config for xilinx ml507 devboard

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 10:32, Adrian Alonso wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>

Acked-by: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@datenfreihafen.org>

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: [PATCH 3/4] linux.inc: add device tree for xilinx ml507

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 10:32, Adrian Alonso wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>

Acked-by: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@datenfreihafen.org>

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: [PATCH 4/4] xilinx-bsp.bbclass: add support for xilinx ml507

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 10:32, Adrian Alonso wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>

Acked-by: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@datenfreihafen.org>

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Adrian Alonso]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1075 bytes --]

Hi,

I just found an error on one recipe xilinx-ml507.conf is in the line where
it defines the u-boot
target machine, running `bitbake console-image` completes without showing
any error, instead
it should warn or return an error since there's no valid configuration
target.

Attached is the proper patch, also I send it to dev mail list.


On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Stefan Schmidt
<stefan@datenfreihafen.org>wrote:

> Hello.
>
> On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 10:32, Adrian Alonso wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
>
> Acked-by: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@datenfreihafen.org>
>
> I've compile tested all four patches here and they work fine. Before
> applying
> I would like to get an ACK from one of our PowerPC guys.
>
> regards
> Stefan Schmidt
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>



-- 
Saludos
Adrian Alonso
http://aalonso.wordpress.com

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-xilinx-ml507.conf-fix-u-boot-config-file.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 843 bytes --]

From 2b470725cda033a1b7e814b57b262015b9b71e4c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 22:38:39 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] xilinx-ml507.conf: fix u-boot config file

Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
---
 conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf b/conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf
index 6194469..b2448e3 100644
--- a/conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf
+++ b/conf/machine/xilinx-ml507.conf
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ MACHINE_FEATURES = "kernel26 ext2 usbhost udev"
 MACHINE_EXTRA_RECOMMENDS = "kernel-modules"
 
 UBOOT_ARCH = "ppc"
-UBOOT_MACHINE = "ml507_defconfig"
+UBOOT_MACHINE = "ml507_config"
 
 # Xilinx EDK override hardware  definitions for xilinx-bsp
 # Include in your local.conf
-- 
1.6.6

Re: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Khem Raj]

On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
> ---
>  conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> index feca186..0c41db4 100644
> --- a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> +++ b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>  TARGET_CC_ARCH = "-mcpu=440"
>  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "ppc440"
>  FEED_ARCH = "ppc440"
> -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
> +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440 ppc440e"


I wonder why this would be needed, I would think that PACKAGE_ARCHS
consists of PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS and PACKAGE_ARCH (which is default
arch constructed from  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH)
if that was the case then ppc440 would be added to supported archs
list already but it seems there is a disconnect between PACKAGE_ARCH
and  PACKAGE_ARCHS I am not sure if it
is deliberate or an oversight. If it is an oversight then it should be
fixed in bitbake.conf and that would avoid this patch.

> --
> 1.6.6
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Adrian Alonso]

Hi Khem,

If I omit the inclusion of the target arch `ppc440` in  PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS
the final image build
fails [1], I been looking on bitbake internals to tray to solve this as you
mention but I'm still clueless
on how to handle it;

My local.conf
---------------------
MACHINE = "xilinx-ml507"
TARGET_ARCH = "powerpc"
TARGET_OS = "linux"
DISTRO = "angstrom-2008.1"

[1] http://pastebin.com/m4f649914

Regards.

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > index feca186..0c41db4 100644
> > --- a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
>


> > +++ b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> >  TARGET_CC_ARCH = "-mcpu=440"
> >  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "ppc440"
> >  FEED_ARCH = "ppc440"
> > -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
> > +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440 ppc440e"
>
>
> I wonder why this would be needed, I would think that PACKAGE_ARCHS
> consists of PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS and PACKAGE_ARCH (which is default
> arch constructed from  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH)
> if that was the case then ppc440 would be added to supported archs
> list already but it seems there is a disconnect between PACKAGE_ARCH
> and  PACKAGE_ARCHS I am not sure if it
> is deliberate or an oversight. If it is an oversight then it should be
> fixed in bitbake.conf and that would avoid this patch.
>
> > --
> > 1.6.6
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openembedded-devel mailing list
> > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>



-- 
Saludos
Adrian Alonso
http://aalonso.wordpress.com

Re: PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS needed? (bitbake.conf) was: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 10:26, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > index feca186..0c41db4 100644
> > --- a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > +++ b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> >  TARGET_CC_ARCH = "-mcpu=440"
> >  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "ppc440"
> >  FEED_ARCH = "ppc440"
> > -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
> > +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440 ppc440e"
> 
> 
> I wonder why this would be needed, I would think that PACKAGE_ARCHS
> consists of PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS and PACKAGE_ARCH (which is default
> arch constructed from  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH)
> if that was the case then ppc440 would be added to supported archs
> list already but it seems there is a disconnect between PACKAGE_ARCH
> and  PACKAGE_ARCHS I am not sure if it
> is deliberate or an oversight. If it is an oversight then it should be
> fixed in bitbake.conf and that would avoid this patch.

Can somebody with more insight in bitbake.conf give us some insight here?

Right now bitbake.conf does not include PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS.

PACKAGE_ARCHS = "all any noarch ${TARGET_ARCH} ${PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS} ${MACHINE}"

If it should stay this way, would Adrian's patch be ok? I would rather get his
contributions in then having them sit to long around. Need to keep people
motivated. :)

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS needed? (bitbake.conf) was: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02-03-10 11:56, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 10:26, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>  conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc |    2 +-
>>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
>>> index feca186..0c41db4 100644
>>> --- a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
>>> +++ b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
>>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>>  TARGET_CC_ARCH = "-mcpu=440"
>>>  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "ppc440"
>>>  FEED_ARCH = "ppc440"
>>> -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
>>> +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440 ppc440e"
>>
>>
>> I wonder why this would be needed, I would think that PACKAGE_ARCHS
>> consists of PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS and PACKAGE_ARCH (which is default
>> arch constructed from  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH)
>> if that was the case then ppc440 would be added to supported archs
>> list already but it seems there is a disconnect between PACKAGE_ARCH
>> and  PACKAGE_ARCHS I am not sure if it
>> is deliberate or an oversight. If it is an oversight then it should be
>> fixed in bitbake.conf and that would avoid this patch.
> 
> Can somebody with more insight in bitbake.conf give us some insight here?
> 
> Right now bitbake.conf does not include PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS.
> 
> PACKAGE_ARCHS = "all any noarch ${TARGET_ARCH} ${PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS} ${MACHINE}"
> 
> If it should stay this way, would Adrian's patch be ok? I would rather get his
> contributions in then having them sit to long around. Need to keep people
> motivated. :)

The patch is OK, but for clarity we should change existing contructs like:

FEED_ARCH = "armv7a"
PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "armv4 armv4t armv5te armv6 armv7 armv7a"
BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "armv7a"

to

BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "armv7a"
FEED_ARCH = "${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH}"
PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "armv4 armv4t armv5te armv6 armv7
${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH}"

So the patch in question would become:

- -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
+PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH} ppc440e"

Does that clarify the situation?

regards,

Koen

PS: bonus points for the person that spots the missing arch in the
cortex-a8 example

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLjQCOMkyGM64RGpERAl42AKCuoPRI8gqMgp0SFtT5uYZsRtkgCgCeJ3iz
T/QmrHoo8dnoZmVfVGvuQio=
=jx83
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS needed? (bitbake.conf) was: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Stefan Schmidt]

Hello.

On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 13:11, Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 02-03-10 11:56, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 10:26, Khem Raj wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc |    2 +-
> >>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> >>> index feca186..0c41db4 100644
> >>> --- a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> >>> +++ b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> >>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> >>>  TARGET_CC_ARCH = "-mcpu=440"
> >>>  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "ppc440"
> >>>  FEED_ARCH = "ppc440"
> >>> -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
> >>> +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440 ppc440e"
> >>
> >>
> >> I wonder why this would be needed, I would think that PACKAGE_ARCHS
> >> consists of PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS and PACKAGE_ARCH (which is default
> >> arch constructed from  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH)
> >> if that was the case then ppc440 would be added to supported archs
> >> list already but it seems there is a disconnect between PACKAGE_ARCH
> >> and  PACKAGE_ARCHS I am not sure if it
> >> is deliberate or an oversight. If it is an oversight then it should be
> >> fixed in bitbake.conf and that would avoid this patch.
> > 
> > Can somebody with more insight in bitbake.conf give us some insight here?
> > 
> > Right now bitbake.conf does not include PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS.
> > 
> > PACKAGE_ARCHS = "all any noarch ${TARGET_ARCH} ${PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS} ${MACHINE}"
> > 
> > If it should stay this way, would Adrian's patch be ok? I would rather get his
> > contributions in then having them sit to long around. Need to keep people
> > motivated. :)
> 
> The patch is OK, but for clarity we should change existing contructs like:
> 
> FEED_ARCH = "armv7a"
> PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "armv4 armv4t armv5te armv6 armv7 armv7a"
> BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "armv7a"
> 
> to
> 
> BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "armv7a"
> FEED_ARCH = "${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH}"
> PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "armv4 armv4t armv5te armv6 armv7
> ${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH}"
> 
> So the patch in question would become:
> 
> - -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
> +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH} ppc440e"

Sounds good to me. Adrian, can you please rework your patch, test it and submit
this onw again?

I'll pick it up with the other patches and push it into the tree.

regards
Stefan Schmidt

Re: PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS needed? (bitbake.conf) was: [PATCH 1/4] tune-ppc440.inc: add ppc440 to PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS

[Adrian Alonso]

Ok, I was looking in this issue, but this helps a lot :)
I'm going to rework the patches since I have more changes in machine config
file
that solves some problems when I was trying to boot on the target as soon I
get them right
I will send them.

Regards
Adrian Alonso

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Stefan Schmidt
<stefan@datenfreihafen.org>wrote:

> Hello.
>
> On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 13:11, Koen Kooi wrote:
> > On 02-03-10 11:56, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 10:26, Khem Raj wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Alonso <aalonso00@gmail.com>
> > >>> ---
> > >>>  conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc |    2 +-
> > >>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > >>> index feca186..0c41db4 100644
> > >>> --- a/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > >>> +++ b/conf/machine/include/tune-ppc440.inc
> > >>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> > >>>  TARGET_CC_ARCH = "-mcpu=440"
> > >>>  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "ppc440"
> > >>>  FEED_ARCH = "ppc440"
> > >>> -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
> > >>> +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440 ppc440e"
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I wonder why this would be needed, I would think that PACKAGE_ARCHS
> > >> consists of PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS and PACKAGE_ARCH (which is default
> > >> arch constructed from  BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH)
> > >> if that was the case then ppc440 would be added to supported archs
> > >> list already but it seems there is a disconnect between PACKAGE_ARCH
> > >> and  PACKAGE_ARCHS I am not sure if it
> > >> is deliberate or an oversight. If it is an oversight then it should be
> > >> fixed in bitbake.conf and that would avoid this patch.
> > >
> > > Can somebody with more insight in bitbake.conf give us some insight
> here?
> > >
> > > Right now bitbake.conf does not include PACKAGE_ARCH in PACKAGE_ARCHS.
> > >
> > > PACKAGE_ARCHS = "all any noarch ${TARGET_ARCH} ${PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS}
> ${MACHINE}"
> > >
> > > If it should stay this way, would Adrian's patch be ok? I would rather
> get his
> > > contributions in then having them sit to long around. Need to keep
> people
> > > motivated. :)
> >
> > The patch is OK, but for clarity we should change existing contructs
> like:
> >
> > FEED_ARCH = "armv7a"
> > PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "armv4 armv4t armv5te armv6 armv7 armv7a"
> > BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "armv7a"
> >
> > to
> >
> > BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH = "armv7a"
> > FEED_ARCH = "${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH}"
> > PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "armv4 armv4t armv5te armv6 armv7
> > ${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH}"
> >
> > So the patch in question would become:
> >
> > - -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "ppc440e"
> > +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS += "${BASE_PACKAGE_ARCH} ppc440e"
>
> Sounds good to me. Adrian, can you please rework your patch, test it and
> submit
> this onw again?
>
> I'll pick it up with the other patches and push it into the tree.
>
> regards
> Stefan Schmidt
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>



-- 
Saludos
Adrian Alonso
http://aalonso.wordpress.com