On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 4:20 AM Luca Ceresoli <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Khem, > > On 29/11/19 17:17, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 6:48 AM Luca Ceresoli <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> From: "Kemal R. Shakir" <[email protected]> > >> > >> Using BB_NUMBER_THREADS to set variables causes an "basehash value changed" > >> error when BB_NUMBER_THREADS is changed between successive builds. > >> > >> Fixes: > >> > >> ERROR: When reparsing > >> .../meta-ti/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-ipc-rtos_git.bb.do_configure, the basehash > >> value changed from 63897a188012cedde03f756b5dbbfa70 to > >> 13b80bf4f4327c367bd201eb4aa32ad7. The metadata is not deterministic and > >> this needs to be fixed. > >> ERROR: When reparsing > >> .../meta-ti/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-ipc-rtos_git.bb.do_compile, the basehash > >> value changed from 2fb59a7db2a2f69d2c25c06c1b6a4245 to > >> 314c664cc040afae2800fcc378dd9ae0. The metadata is not deterministic and > >> this needs to be fixed. > >> > >> Steps to reproduce: > >> > >> BB_NUMBER_THREADS="3" bitbake ti-ipc-rtos > >> BB_NUMBER_THREADS="4" bitbake -c cleansstate osal-rtos > >> BB_NUMBER_THREADS="5" bitbake ti-ipc-rtos > >> > >> Reported here: https://e2e.ti.com/support/processors/f/791/p/825142/3059419 > >> Patch from Kemal R. Shakir > >> Reported-by: Matthew McKee (e-mail unknown) > >> [Luca: add detailed commit message] > >> Tested-by: Luca Ceresoli <[email protected]> > >> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <[email protected]> > >> > >> --- > >> > >> I'm having the same problem and found this patch solving it on e2e.ti.com, > >> but it does not appear on any git branch nor in the meta-ti mailing list. I > >> tested it on the thud branch and fixes the problem. Can it be applied to > >> both thud and future branches? > >> > >> Thanks > >> --- > >> classes/ti-pdk.bbclass | 2 +- > >> recipes-ti/ipc/ti-ipc-rtos.inc | 2 +- > >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/classes/ti-pdk.bbclass b/classes/ti-pdk.bbclass > >> index f0e6f2d2738a..5f78bafa94b5 100644 > >> --- a/classes/ti-pdk.bbclass > >> +++ b/classes/ti-pdk.bbclass > >> @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ TI_PDK_DOXYGEN_SUPPORT ?= "1" > >> > >> TI_PDK_XDC_ARGS ?= "${TI_PDK_LIMIT_SOCS}" > >> > >> -PARALLEL_XDC = "--jobs=${BB_NUMBER_THREADS}" > >> +PARALLEL_XDC = "--jobs=${@oe.utils.cpu_count()}" > > > > this may create another variableto control when limting parallelism so > > expressing it in > > terms of BB_NUMBER_THREAD s desired > > > > perhaps you can try adding > > > > do_configure[vardepsexclude] = "PARALLEL_XDC" > > do_compile[vardepsexclude] = "PARALLEL_XDC" > > Thank you for your review. > > I agree the solution in this patch is not ideal as it removes ability to > control the build load. > > However using BB_NUMBER_THREADS (with our without vardepsexclude) is > also not quite correct. PARALLEL_XDC should have to do with > PARALLEL_MAKE, not BB_NUMBER_THREADS. > > But PARALLEL_MAKE is not a number, so using PARALLEL_MAKE would be > correct but it's not doable, and using BB_NUMBER_THREADS is doable but > not quite correct... :( > > Bottom line: for lack of better ideas, I'm sending a new patch that > keeps using BB_NUMBER_THREADS and takes your suggestion above. I guess > it should be OK for most users. At least it's not worse than the current > behavior and can still be improved later. >
another option would be to use parallel_make_argument to contruct what you want e.g. see how boost does it https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/tree/meta/recipes-support/boost/boost.inc#n141 > -- > Luca
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#12538): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/12538 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/64369908/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
