On Thu, 2026-07-30 at 11:43 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Mon, 2026-07-27 at 11:05 +0200, Nora Schiffer via lists.openembedded.org > wrote: > > It is a bit weird that FIT_KERNEL_COMP_ALG also affects uImage creation, > > as kernel-uboot.bbclass is used for both, but fixing that would > > unnecessarily break backwards compatibility. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nora Schiffer <[email protected]> > > --- > > meta/classes-recipe/kernel-uboot.bbclass | 3 +-- > > meta/conf/image-fitimage.conf | 3 +++ > > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/meta/classes-recipe/kernel-uboot.bbclass > > b/meta/classes-recipe/kernel-uboot.bbclass > > index fa28be1715..9beccc2dff 100644 > > --- a/meta/classes-recipe/kernel-uboot.bbclass > > +++ b/meta/classes-recipe/kernel-uboot.bbclass > > @@ -4,8 +4,7 @@ > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT > > # > > > > -# fitImage kernel compression algorithm > > -FIT_KERNEL_COMP_ALG ?= "gzip" > > +require conf/image-fitimage.conf > > > > # Kernel image type passed to mkimage (i.e. kernel kernel_noload...) > > UBOOT_MKIMAGE_KERNEL_TYPE ?= "kernel" > > diff --git a/meta/conf/image-fitimage.conf b/meta/conf/image-fitimage.conf > > index a06d30e494..abb17186a5 100644 > > --- a/meta/conf/image-fitimage.conf > > +++ b/meta/conf/image-fitimage.conf > > @@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ FIT_OS ?= "linux" > > # DTBs are provided separately in a FIT image. > > FIT_LINUX_BIN ?= "linux.bin" > > > > +# fitImage kernel compression algorithm > > +FIT_KERNEL_COMP_ALG ?= "gzip" > > + > > # Additional mkimage options for FIT image creation > > FIT_MKIMAGE_EXTRA_OPTS ?= "" > > > > We're realising that the kernel classes are a bit of a tangled spiders > web and we want to improve things and clean things up. > > Adding a dependency on "fit" from the "uboot" class does therefore feed > a bit backward as you note. > > You mention not breaking backwards compatibility. I think given the > other work we're thinking about, it might be worth considering that and > seeing if we can avoid tangling things up even further. > > Cheers, > > Richard
Okay, new plan: Change uboot_prep_kimage to accept the compression algorithm as an argument, so we can use different variables when calling it from kernel- uimage.bbclass and kernel-fit-extra-artifacts.bbclass. kernel-uimage.bbclass could then use a separate variable UBOOT_MKIMAGE_KERNEL_COMP_ALG instead of reusing the FIT one. A more radical approach would be to skip the deprecation of using a linux.bin generated by the kernel recipe as a FIT image's kernel and drop support immediately. This would result in kernel-fit-extra-artifacts.bbclass not needing kernel-uboot.bbclass anymore, and maybe kernel-fit-extra-artifacts.bbclass could then be dropped in favor of listing setup.bin in KERNEL_IMAGETYPES if it is needed. I'm a bit worried doing all that at once might cause too much breakage, and I think an incremental approach with deprecation warnings works fine here, but of course that also depends on the other work you want to do. Let me know which direction you prefer for the next iteration of these patches. Best, Nora > > -- TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018 Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider https://www.tq-group.com/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#242339): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/242339 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/120464164/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
