On 05/09/2011 11:38 AM, Franz Leitl wrote: > Am Montag 09 Mai 2011, 20:23:19 schrieb Darren Hart: >> On 05/09/2011 10:53 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: >>> Op 9 mei 2011, om 19:32 heeft Franz Leitl het volgende geschreven: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Am Montag 09 Mai 2011, 18:28:06 schrieben Sie: >>>>>> I've tried to get compcache kernel module building against 2.6.34 from >>>>>> shr- core but found some issues with kernel.bbclass and >>>>>> module.bbclass. >>>>>> >>>>>> The kernel.bbclass deletes the .c files from scripts directory which >>>>>> are later needed by make prepare to recreate bound.h and other files. >>>>>> Compcache kernel module, for example, depends on bounds.h. >>>>> >>>>> The bounds.h should not need to be recreated. It is created during the >>>>> build of the kernel, and since 2.6.26, the makefile knows not to remove >>>>> it. >>>> >>>> Compache does not build without bounds.h and this file is missing in the >>>> staging directory for what ever reason. >>> >>> I ran into the same and I did the following: >>> >>> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-texasinstrumen >>> ts/commit/?id=7bcba149f05cc9c5d8ce956ee40e2c6849601470 >> >> Thanks Koen, I knew we had discussed this once before. In your case, >> IIRC, you found that the "make clean" deleted bounds.h, even with the >> fix from 2.6.26 applied. >> >> At the time we agreed that patching the kernel bbclasses for a bug in a >> particular kernel version wasn't a good plan. I'm concerned that Franz >> is hitting this with 2.6.34. >> >> Franz, can you confirm that bounds.h exists before the clean and does >> not exist after the clean? Some simple instrumentation to kernel.bbclass >> should be able to do this. > I'll try to find out. > >> If so, we need to look into why that is happening. Simply not deleting >> the C files from the source isn't an acceptable fix to save 1 file. > The c files are deleted by the kernel.bbclass not by "make clean" while make > clean deletes the bounds.h... Who is doing the wrong thing now? > kernel.bbclass > removing the bounds.c, kernel's make clean removing the bounds.h or the > module > author relying on modules.h?
The kernel should not remove bounds.h, that is documented in the Makefile. If it does, it's a bug. > > I don't know if/what the problem is with regenerating some things in > module.bbclass. It is already done with "make scripts". Cleaning up > things to save diskspace and recreating if needed does not seem to > bad to me. Am I missing something? The scripts are regenerated as they are host specific. If you were to use an sstate package, you don't want host-specific binaries in it. (We aren't there yet, but we want to keep that in mind). It's just about fixing it properly instead of applying a band-aid. Regenerating something that shouldn't have been deleted in the first place is a band-aid, and you can go that route in your own recipe if you like (per Koen's patch), but that doesn't belong in the core kernel classes. Thanks, -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
