On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 03:33:03PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 15:01 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > Hi, > > > > when building spitz and qemuarm (both produces packages in armv5te feed) > > resulting packages are tuned with -mtune=xscale (when built for spitz) > > or -mtune=arm926ej-s (when built for qemuarm). > > > > From > > https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1916#c5 > > Firstly, if you go changing the tune parameters in a given machine, > > you are expected to use a different PACKAGE_ARCH. If you do that, you > > will get a different package feed for the different binaries, > > different WORKDIR and so on. This was always the way the package > > architectures was intended to work and nothing has changed there. Yes, > > you as the user changing various variables can create inconsistent > > package feeds. There are 101 ways you can do that, the simple answer > > is just don't. We're therefore unlikely to add MACHINE to DEPLOY_DIR > > or remove PACKAGE_ARCH, please just use it as its intended. > > > > Does qemuarm use oe-core as it's intended? > > > > Shouldn't spitz produce something like armv5te-xscale and qemuarm > > armv5te-arm926ejs? > > It would cause all recipes to build again (cannot share armv5te feed > > anymore), > > but at least it would build it and user will really get it on target, right > > now > > opkg upgrade can download some packages with xscale some with arm926ej-s. > > > > $ ~/bitbake/bin/bitbake-diffsigs > > > > stamps.1347348910/spitz/armv5te-oe-linux-gnueabi/linux-libc-headers-3.4.3-r0.do_configure.sigdata.04b364a15889fcff7502614f1c116abc > > > > stamps.1347348910/qemuarm/armv5te-oe-linux-gnueabi/linux-libc-headers-3.4.3-r0.do_configure.sigdata.656f0583be969b427f040f2e143bcb14 > > basehash changed from 7fe9c0a3455dac20ba6a90ed337b097e to > > d8dd2ff8613d0aafe60bef1a1e9469a1 > > Variable TUNE_CCARGS value changed from > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "armv5", > > "-march=armv5${ARMPKGSFX_THUMB}${ARMPKGSFX_DSP}", "", d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "armv4", > > "-march=armv4${ARMPKGSFX_THUMB}", "", d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "thumb", "${ARM_THUMB_M_OPT}", "", > > d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "no-thumb-interwork", > > "-mno-thumb-interwork", "-mthumb-interwork", d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "vfp", > > bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "callconvention-hard", > > "-mfloat-abi=hard", "-mfloat-abi=softfp", d), "" ,d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "xscale", "-mtune=xscale", "", d)} > > to > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "armv5", > > "-march=armv5${ARMPKGSFX_THUMB}${ARMPKGSFX_DSP}", "", d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "armv4", > > "-march=armv4${ARMPKGSFX_THUMB}", "", d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "thumb", "${ARM_THUMB_M_OPT}", "", > > d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "no-thumb-interwork", > > "-mno-thumb-interwork", "-mthumb-interwork", d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "vfp", > > bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "callconvention-hard", > > "-mfloat-abi=hard", "-mfloat-abi=softfp", d), "" ,d)} > > ${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", "arm926ejs", "-mtune=arm926ej-s", > > "", d)} > > > > This is a tricky one. As others have mentioned, this is a tune > parameter, not an arch one and as such the binaries are compatible with > each other although they potentially are compiled differently with > different optimisations. > > As such, mixing the feeds is permitted and will not cause any real world > usage problem. As you point out, sstate is much more sensitive to this > kind of change and is correctly deciding the output is different though. > > I think my preferred approach would be to have the tune files do > something like: > > -mtune=${ARMV5TEDEFAULTTUNE} > > and then the user can set ARMV5DEFAULTTUNE to whatever the believe is a > appropriate. This would result in the package feed at least having a > consistent state of one tune and sstate would be happy. It then becomes > a distro policy decision which is what it should be. ARMV5TEDEFAULTTUNE > would default to the current values meaning the distro would then just > do: > > ARMV5TEDEFAULTTUNE_poky = "xscale" > > and hence make their decision. Of course the distro could also decide to > split the package architectures up which is equally fine. > > Does something like that sound like it would work?
My solution seems to be a bit more flexible then this. -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
