[PATCH 1/2] iscsitarget: split the kernel module into separate package

[PATCH 1/2] iscsitarget: split the kernel module into separate package

[jackie.huang]

From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>

inherit module instead of module-base, so the module is
split into kernel-module-iscsi-trgt and make PN rdepends
on it.

Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
---
 .../iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb                 | 10 ++--------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
index c96810b..9d49759 100644
--- a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
+++ b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
@@ -15,10 +15,7 @@ SRC_URI = "http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/ubuntu/pool/universe/i/${BPN}/${BPN}_${P
 SRC_URI[md5sum] = "ef9bc823bbabd3c772208c00d5f2d089"
 SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "d3196ccb78a43266dce28587bfe30d8ab4db7566d7bce96057dfbb84100babb5"
 
-inherit module-base
-
-# Add make_scripts task to create kernel scripts
-addtask make_scripts after do_patch before do_compile
+inherit module
 
 do_configure[noexec] = "1"
 
@@ -26,9 +23,6 @@ do_configure[noexec] = "1"
 # kernel scripts
 do_make_scripts[depends] += "virtual/kernel:do_shared_workdir"
 
-# Make sure we don't have race condition against "make scripts"
-do_make_scripts[lockfiles] = "${TMPDIR}/kernel-scripts.lock"
-
 do_compile() {
     oe_runmake KSRC=${STAGING_KERNEL_DIR} CFLAGS='${CFLAGS}' LDFLAGS='' \
     CC="${CC}" V=1
@@ -56,7 +50,7 @@ do_install() {
 }
 
 FILES_${PN} += "${sbindir} \
-                /lib \
                 ${sysconfdir}"
 
+RDEPENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-iscsi-trgt"
 RRECOMMENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-crc32c kernel-module-libcrc32c"
-- 
2.3.5

[PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules

[jackie.huang]

From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>

Kernel modules may not have the same architecture as user space.
So we tell INSANE_SKIP to skip checking the arch for the modules.
This is consistent with other kernel modules and the kernel recipe.

Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
---
 .../recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb        | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
index 9d49759..9db16bc 100644
--- a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
+++ b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
@@ -54,3 +54,6 @@ FILES_${PN} += "${sbindir} \
 
 RDEPENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-iscsi-trgt"
 RRECOMMENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-crc32c kernel-module-libcrc32c"
+
+# Skip the arch test for kernel modules
+INSANE_SKIP_kernel-module-iscsi-trgt = "arch"
-- 
2.3.5

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules

[Koen Kooi]

Op 25-11-15 om 09:27 schreef jackie.huang@windriver.com:
> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> 
> Kernel modules may not have the same architecture as user space.

LOL

> So we tell INSANE_SKIP to skip checking the arch for the modules.
> This is consistent with other kernel modules and the kernel recipe.

Split this recipe in 2: one recipe for userspace, the other for kernel space.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules

[Joe MacDonald]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:27 AM, <jackie.huang@windriver.com> wrote:

> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
>
> Kernel modules may not have the same architecture as user space.
> So we tell INSANE_SKIP to skip checking the arch for the modules.
> This is consistent with other kernel modules and the kernel recipe.
>

This one still hasn't been merged and since iscsitarget is currently
unbuildable, I'm not in a rush to merge this one particularly since I'm not
really clear on the logic underlying the change.  I searched the archives
and found your response to Martin was essentially "see my netmap-modules
patch for an explanation" and in that one the explanation was basically
"this is the way other kernel modules do it".  I merged that one but now
I'm thinking I shouldn't have without more careful consideration.  Am I
correct in thinking that this problem only shows up when you're building
for multilib?  I've reverted "netmap-modules: Modules may not have the same
arch as userspace" in my contrib tree at
http://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded-contrib/log/?h=joeythesaint/meta-networking-next
and my initial test builds showed no QA issues related to netmap-modules
and the arch checks.  So I started looking around for other kernel modules
doing something similar and I don't actually see this
"INSANE_SKIP_kernel-module-*" construct being used anywhere else in meta-oe
or poky (and at the least I would expect something like cryptodev-module to
need it, it looks like an analogue to me).  Can you fill me in on what's
special with iscsitarget and netmap, because even if it is a multilib
issue, why wouldn't that be showing up for other kernel modules built in
poky?

Thanks.

-J.


>
> Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> ---
>  .../recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb        |
> 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git
> a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+
> svn502.bb
> b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+
> svn502.bb
> index 9d49759..9db16bc 100644
> --- a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+
> svn502.bb
> +++ b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+
> svn502.bb
> @@ -54,3 +54,6 @@ FILES_${PN} += "${sbindir} \
>
>  RDEPENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-iscsi-trgt"
>  RRECOMMENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-crc32c kernel-module-libcrc32c"
> +
> +# Skip the arch test for kernel modules
> +INSANE_SKIP_kernel-module-iscsi-trgt = "arch"
> --
> 2.3.5
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>



-- 
Joe MacDonald
:wq

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules

[Huang, Jie (Jackie)]

> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:27 AM, <jackie.huang@windriver.com> wrote:
> From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> 
> Kernel modules may not have the same architecture as user space.
> So we tell INSANE_SKIP to skip checking the arch for the modules.
> This is consistent with other kernel modules and the kernel recipe.
> 
> This one still hasn't been merged and since iscsitarget is currently unbuildable, 
> I'm not in a rush to merge this one particularly since I'm not really clear on the 
> logic underlying the change.  I searched the archives and found your response to 
> Martin was essentially "see my netmap-modules patch for an explanation" and in that 
> one the explanation was basically "this is the way other kernel modules do it". 

I think I meant to refer to this one which is not merged either:
commit 6727154c929f3dc8ed86bab29aa1de88620906e9
Author: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
Date:   Tue Nov 17 01:44:47 2015 -0800

    netmap-modules: skip the arch check for kernel module
    
    When building on a multilib capable BSP, it's possible for the
    kernel bit size to be different than the userspace. Avoid the
    QA test when building the kernel module.
    
    Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>

sorry that if the explanation is not clear enough.

> I merged that one but now I'm thinking I shouldn't have without more careful consideration.  

The one you merged is "netmap-modules: Modules may not have the same arch as userspace"
and Mark helped to split and re-word the commit message like what it is now.

> Am I correct in thinking that this problem only shows up when you're building for multilib?  

We have BSPs with a 64 bit kernel + modules + 32 bit userspace by default, the
problem always show up when we're building such BSP, and we have a bbclass to
add INSANE_SKIP for internal modules:

# sanity updates. The do_package_qa_prepend and vmlinux sanity
# flags allow a 64 bit kernel + modules to be packaged against a
# 32 bit userspace. If external modules are built, they must supply
# their own INSANE_SKIP_<module> = "arch" if they want to be properly
# packaged.
python do_package_qa_prepend () {


> I've reverted "netmap-modules: Modules may not have the same arch as userspace" in my contrib 
> tree at http://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded-contrib/log/?h=joeythesaint/meta-networking-next 
> and my initial test builds showed no QA issues related to netmap-modules and the arch checks.  
> So I started looking around for other kernel modules doing something similar and I don't actually 
> see this "INSANE_SKIP_kernel-module-*" construct being used anywhere else in meta-oe or poky 
> (and at the least I would expect something like cryptodev-module to need it, it looks like an 
> analogue to me).  Can you fill me in on what's special with iscsitarget and netmap, because 
> even if it is a multilib issue, why wouldn't that be showing up for other kernel modules built 
> in poky?

That's because there is no such BSP like I mentioned above in poky, I
undersatand if this is not accpeted, we may add this in our own layer.

Thanks,
Jackie


> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -J.
>  
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> ---
>  .../recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb        | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
> index 9d49759..9db16bc 100644
> --- a/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
> +++ b/meta-networking/recipes-extended/iscsitarget/iscsitarget_1.4.20.3+svn502.bb
> @@ -54,3 +54,6 @@ FILES_${PN} += "${sbindir} \
> 
>  RDEPENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-iscsi-trgt"
>  RRECOMMENDS_${PN} = "kernel-module-crc32c kernel-module-libcrc32c"
> +
> +# Skip the arch test for kernel modules
> +INSANE_SKIP_kernel-module-iscsi-trgt = "arch"
> --
> 2.3.5
> 
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Joe MacDonald
> :wq
>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules

[Joe MacDonald]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3945 bytes --]

Hi Jackie,

[Re: [oe] [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules] On 16.03.03 (Thu 04:41) Huang, Jie (Jackie) wrote:

> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:27 AM, <jackie.huang@windriver.com> wrote:
> > From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> > 
> > Kernel modules may not have the same architecture as user space.
> > So we tell INSANE_SKIP to skip checking the arch for the modules.
> > This is consistent with other kernel modules and the kernel recipe.
> > 
> > This one still hasn't been merged and since iscsitarget is currently unbuildable, 
> > I'm not in a rush to merge this one particularly since I'm not really clear on the 
> > logic underlying the change.  I searched the archives and found your response to 
> > Martin was essentially "see my netmap-modules patch for an explanation" and in that 
> > one the explanation was basically "this is the way other kernel modules do it". 
> 
> I think I meant to refer to this one which is not merged either:
> commit 6727154c929f3dc8ed86bab29aa1de88620906e9
> Author: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> Date:   Tue Nov 17 01:44:47 2015 -0800
> 
>     netmap-modules: skip the arch check for kernel module
>     
>     When building on a multilib capable BSP, it's possible for the
>     kernel bit size to be different than the userspace. Avoid the
>     QA test when building the kernel module.
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> 
> sorry that if the explanation is not clear enough.
> 
> > I merged that one but now I'm thinking I shouldn't have without more
> > careful consideration.  
> 
> The one you merged is "netmap-modules: Modules may not have the same arch as userspace"
> and Mark helped to split and re-word the commit message like what it is now.

Okay, so at least I am looking at what I think I'm looking at.

> > Am I correct in thinking that this problem only shows up when you're
> > building for multilib?  
> 
> We have BSPs with a 64 bit kernel + modules + 32 bit userspace by default, the
> problem always show up when we're building such BSP, and we have a bbclass to
> add INSANE_SKIP for internal modules:
> 
> # sanity updates. The do_package_qa_prepend and vmlinux sanity
> # flags allow a 64 bit kernel + modules to be packaged against a
> # 32 bit userspace. If external modules are built, they must supply
> # their own INSANE_SKIP_<module> = "arch" if they want to be properly
> # packaged.
> python do_package_qa_prepend () {

I guess in this case you mean it's a bbclass that's internal to Wind
River, I did a quick search and couldn't find the code you reference above
anywhere in my poky tree.

> > I've reverted "netmap-modules: Modules may not have the same arch as userspace" in my contrib 
> > tree at http://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded-contrib/log/?h=joeythesaint/meta-networking-next 
> > and my initial test builds showed no QA issues related to netmap-modules and the arch checks.  
> > So I started looking around for other kernel modules doing something similar and I don't actually 
> > see this "INSANE_SKIP_kernel-module-*" construct being used anywhere else in meta-oe or poky 
> > (and at the least I would expect something like cryptodev-module to need it, it looks like an 
> > analogue to me).  Can you fill me in on what's special with iscsitarget and netmap, because 
> > even if it is a multilib issue, why wouldn't that be showing up for other kernel modules built 
> > in poky?
> 
> That's because there is no such BSP like I mentioned above in poky, I
> undersatand if this is not accpeted, we may add this in our own layer.

I think that's best, since otherwise the you'll be submitting these
changes for any external module to support a use-case that we don't have
in Yocto and there's no obvious corresponding behaviour in poky.

Thanks.

-- 
-Joe MacDonald.
:wq

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 484 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules

[Huang, Jie (Jackie)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe MacDonald [mailto:Joe_MacDonald@mentor.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 12:17 AM
> To: Huang, Jie (Jackie)
> Cc: openembedded-devel
> Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules
> 
> Hi Jackie,
> 
> [Re: [oe] [PATCH 2/2] iscsitarget: skip the arch test for kernel modules] On 16.03.03 (Thu 04:41) Huang,
> Jie (Jackie) wrote:
> 
> > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:27 AM, <jackie.huang@windriver.com> wrote:
> > > From: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> > >
> > > Kernel modules may not have the same architecture as user space.
> > > So we tell INSANE_SKIP to skip checking the arch for the modules.
> > > This is consistent with other kernel modules and the kernel recipe.
> > >
> > > This one still hasn't been merged and since iscsitarget is currently unbuildable,
> > > I'm not in a rush to merge this one particularly since I'm not really clear on the
> > > logic underlying the change.  I searched the archives and found your response to
> > > Martin was essentially "see my netmap-modules patch for an explanation" and in that
> > > one the explanation was basically "this is the way other kernel modules do it".
> >
> > I think I meant to refer to this one which is not merged either:
> > commit 6727154c929f3dc8ed86bab29aa1de88620906e9
> > Author: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> > Date:   Tue Nov 17 01:44:47 2015 -0800
> >
> >     netmap-modules: skip the arch check for kernel module
> >
> >     When building on a multilib capable BSP, it's possible for the
> >     kernel bit size to be different than the userspace. Avoid the
> >     QA test when building the kernel module.
> >
> >     Signed-off-by: Jackie Huang <jackie.huang@windriver.com>
> >
> > sorry that if the explanation is not clear enough.
> >
> > > I merged that one but now I'm thinking I shouldn't have without more
> > > careful consideration.
> >
> > The one you merged is "netmap-modules: Modules may not have the same arch as userspace"
> > and Mark helped to split and re-word the commit message like what it is now.
> 
> Okay, so at least I am looking at what I think I'm looking at.
> 
> > > Am I correct in thinking that this problem only shows up when you're
> > > building for multilib?
> >
> > We have BSPs with a 64 bit kernel + modules + 32 bit userspace by default, the
> > problem always show up when we're building such BSP, and we have a bbclass to
> > add INSANE_SKIP for internal modules:
> >
> > # sanity updates. The do_package_qa_prepend and vmlinux sanity
> > # flags allow a 64 bit kernel + modules to be packaged against a
> > # 32 bit userspace. If external modules are built, they must supply
> > # their own INSANE_SKIP_<module> = "arch" if they want to be properly
> > # packaged.
> > python do_package_qa_prepend () {
> 
> I guess in this case you mean it's a bbclass that's internal to Wind

Yes.

> River, I did a quick search and couldn't find the code you reference above
> anywhere in my poky tree.
> 
> > > I've reverted "netmap-modules: Modules may not have the same arch as userspace" in my contrib
> > > tree at http://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded-contrib/log/?h=joeythesaint/meta-
> networking-next
> > > and my initial test builds showed no QA issues related to netmap-modules and the arch checks.
> > > So I started looking around for other kernel modules doing something similar and I don't actually
> > > see this "INSANE_SKIP_kernel-module-*" construct being used anywhere else in meta-oe or poky
> > > (and at the least I would expect something like cryptodev-module to need it, it looks like an
> > > analogue to me).  Can you fill me in on what's special with iscsitarget and netmap, because
> > > even if it is a multilib issue, why wouldn't that be showing up for other kernel modules built
> > > in poky?
> >
> > That's because there is no such BSP like I mentioned above in poky, I
> > undersatand if this is not accpeted, we may add this in our own layer.
> 
> I think that's best, since otherwise the you'll be submitting these
> changes for any external module to support a use-case that we don't have
> in Yocto and there's no obvious corresponding behaviour in poky.

Ok, I see, thanks!

Thanks,
Jackie

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> -Joe MacDonald.
> :wq