On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:48 AM Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 3/23/21 5:16 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 12:29 AM Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 3/22/21 11:44 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > >>> From: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com> > >>> > >>> The kernel SRCREV updates were missing riscv32, so stayed back on > >>> 5.10.21, which causes build issues as PV is out of sync with the > >>> actual kernel version. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com> > >>> --- > >>> meta/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.10.bb | 2 +- > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.10.bb > >>> b/meta/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.10.bb > >>> index 9c122832f4..83e70d01d1 100644 > >>> --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.10.bb > >>> +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.10.bb > >>> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ SRCREV_machine_qemuarm64 ?= > >>> "04a11eb4aec4efe3064f27b207e8a41c28bb08cd" > >>> SRCREV_machine_qemumips ?= "68527a50a2f5b0992ba85255325d76a9f187c237" > >>> SRCREV_machine_qemuppc ?= "04a11eb4aec4efe3064f27b207e8a41c28bb08cd" > >>> SRCREV_machine_qemuriscv64 ?= > >>> "04a11eb4aec4efe3064f27b207e8a41c28bb08cd" > >>> -SRCREV_machine_qemuriscv32 ?= "8c516ced69f41563404ada0bea315a55bcf1df6f" > >>> +SRCREV_machine_qemuriscv32 ?= "04a11eb4aec4efe3064f27b207e8a41c28bb08cd" > >>> SRCREV_machine_qemux86 ?= "04a11eb4aec4efe3064f27b207e8a41c28bb08cd" > >>> SRCREV_machine_qemux86-64 ?= "04a11eb4aec4efe3064f27b207e8a41c28bb08cd" > >>> SRCREV_machine_qemumips64 ?= "c19b50af1e3680ff6050a0cce8dcd888accafd9b" > >>> > >> > >> I wonder if we really need to lock the machines using tip of > >> v5.10/standard/base e.g. x86/x86_64/ppc64/rv64/rv32 > > > > I'm not sure I understand the question / comment. > > SRCREV for the machines are said is same and perhaps branch too. So I > was saying if this perhaps is not required to set the SRCREV per machine > for such machines.
It's automatic once in my update scripts (which it is now), and I'd rather be explicit on these, since the machine overrides are both flexible and self-documentation. There won't be any future individual bumps of this, it'll just be done along with everything else. Cheers, Bruce > > > > > They are on the tip of that branch now, but still must be separately > > specified so we have the individual control as needed. > > > > But they all do need to walk forward at the same pace. Every -stable > > goes to all BSP branches. Supporting them on different versions just > > isn't sane. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Bruce > > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#149829): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/149829 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/81532821/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
