On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 11:27 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Sat, 2014-12-20 at 21:04 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > On 2014-12-20 5:40 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > On Sat, 2014-12-20 at 10:13 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > >> On 2014-12-20 6:15 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > >>> So where are we at? > > >>> > > >>> Thanks to some great help from Ross, we have a number of patches merged > > >>> and many of the issues in my last email have been addressed. I'm > > >>> continuing to struggle with the kernel series. The last build on the > > >>> autobuilder highlighted that: > > >>> > > >>> * there are problems in boot-directdisk.bbclass (have a fix) > > >>> * there is a do_rootfs/do_package_qa race (have a fix) > > >>> * the report-error.bbclass tasks could crash (have a fix) > > >>> * the kernelmodule sanity tests were failing (have a fix) > > >>> * qemumips gdb is failing to compile, probably due to new kernel > > >>> headers (no fix as yet) > > >>> * systemd sanity QA tests continue to fail on xorg and systemd-login > > >>> (no fix as yet) > > >>> * there are continuing problems with linux-imx from meta-fsl-arm, I > > >>> thought these were addressed but clearly not :( > > >>> > > >>> Ideally I'd like to take some time off over the holidays but I can't see > > >>> that happening until the patch queues are under some kind of control :(. > > >> > > >> Let me know if there are one of these that you want me to take. I'm all > > >> for pitching in and getting everyone some down time. > > > > > > Looks like I spoke too soon: > > > > > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/main/builders/nightly-x86/builds/132/steps/BuildImages_1/logs/stdio > > > > Amazing how those race conditions pop out on the builders .. I probably > > built this 100 times, and never managed to trigger these. > > We also have one more: > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/main/builders/nightly-ppc/builds/134/steps/Running%20Sanity%20Tests/logs/stdio > > On target module building for ppc fails. > > > > which seems to be a race over the kernel source directory. I'm guessing > > > the file in question is a temporary build artefact of lttng-modules > > > which was running at the same time? Any way we can avoid temp files in > > > the kernel source dir? > > > > Hmm. The modules should already have their output directory set to their > > own source (not the kernel), so they really shouldn't be dropping down > > any temp files. > > > > I was only using the cpio method to copy the source since that is what > > was already being used .. and it is a bit faster. The stat of the > > files to the pipe is what is catching us here. > > > > The question is .. do we really care ? A straight copy of the files wouldn't > > be so sensitive to this, or we could explicitly exclude then in the > > existing cpio pipe. That would buy some time to track down what is > > touching down the tmp file in the kernel build process, and I can't see > > how the dual use of that staged directory will cause us a problem on > > the copied kernel source side (we do clean things up before packaging). > > Well, I think we need to get to the bottom of this. I made some > experiments. The best results were from hacking scripts/Kbuild.include > where these .tmp files get created, I hacked it not to remove them. > > When you do that, it becomes clear that do_make_scripts is the task > which is causing the problem. > > The world has changed since we last visited the scripts problem, we > could move that task to the main kernel build now and have the modules > and kernel-devsrc depend on it? The function in module.bbclass would > then become a placeholder?
After a lot of trail and error I've sent out a couple of patches for the above two issues. These fix the immediate problems however I think there is more cleanup than needs to be done early next year. I filed: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7095 since the overlap between kernel-dev and kernel-devsrc is problematic and should get resolved. This may help resolve the powerpc problem in a nicer way if devsrc is *just* the source and dev has some artefacts like the build config. It may be we have a separate package for the artefacts too, I'm open to ideas. I did start to experiment with cleaning up the scripts handling in the build tree: http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=rpurdie/t222&id=760fa19a11165ff02c5df38cc89335fc503afba2 I have mixed feelings about it that, we really do need to try and do something about it though. Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
