Re: Building custom kernel using rpmbuild method fails with config conflicts between kernel-local and x86_64.config
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 13:48:28 -0500 Laura Abbott wrote: > Your changes to kernel-local should still be going through when > you build, if not that is absolutely a bug that needs to get fixed. > The message "override" is coming from the kernel tree not the > Fedora kernel tree > > What process_configs.sh is doing is checking to make sure all of > the settings you have given will not get changed. Kconfig will > silently switch the settings of options if you set things > incorrectly, (switching from =y to =m or just turning options off > completely) which can be confusing. The goal of these checks is to be > pedantic and make sure all the values are set to what you expect. We > actually want to treat all warnings as errors because even if Kconfig > thinks this is a warning, the actual issue is that > CONFIG_PSTORE_LZ4HC_COMPRESS_DEFAULT may not be what you expect. > Thanks for the explanation. > >> 2) Turn off the checking by building --without configchecks > > > > It looks like this is what I'll have to do, though I don't like > > bypassing consistency checks. Heh, my kernels have been building > > and running fine for years without this, so maybe it's OK. :-) > > > > If the options you've been using are working, it's probably fine > to turn the checks. Yeah, I'll go with this. With your explanation I feel a lot better about it. Thanks. ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [PATCH] Upstream fix for Raven Ridge
On 11/24/19 12:38 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: Hello team, Upstream provided several bug fix related to AMD APU Raven Ridge which hangs when using some applications like radeontop to read its interface [1]. Test model was 2018 HP Envy x360 Ryzen 2500U (device id 15dd): drm/amdgpu: disable gfxoff when using register read interface -- https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux/commit/?h=drm-fixes-5.4&id=c57040d333c6729ce99c2cb95061045ff84c89ea Original Raven Ridge (15d8) becomes unstable when using gfxoff. The test model Ryzen 2500U with id 15dd and above is unaffected drm/amdgpu: disable gfxoff on original raven - https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux/commit/?h=drm-fixes-5.4&id=941a0a7945c39f36a16634bc65c2649a1b94eee1 Revert "drm/amd/display: enable S/G for RAVEN chip" https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux/commit/?h=drm-fixes-5.4&id=a0184d71163aab258d73141a8839675d6cbdcf40 It will be nice to backport for the current kernel 5.3. Thanks in advance. Do the fixes apply cleanly to 5.3? I saw they are tagged for stable so it may just be easier to wait until they show up there. Given the time frame, it may end up about the same as waiting for 5.4 anyway. ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Building custom kernel using rpmbuild method fails with config conflicts between kernel-local and x86_64.config
On 11/25/19 11:02 AM, stan wrote: On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 08:15:46 -0500 Laura Abbott wrote: The process_configs.sh checks are designed to catch values changing unexpecedtly the message override: PSTORE_LZ4HC_COMPRESS_DEFAULT changes choice state This indicates that some value set are now changed. This looks like process_configs doing its job and not an actual error. It's also a little hard to tell without seeing the full build log and what changes you are actually making. I see two options: Then this makes the kernel-local obsolete, because the point of having a kernel-local file is to change config options from the default state. I'm making extensive changes to the config file to customize it for my system exclusively. File systems I don't use are gone. Graphics devices I don't use are gone. Ditto audio devices. Ditto network cards. etc. When I use the custom config file with make oldconfig, there are no complaints. I notice that this is a warning rather than an actual error, even though the configcheck is treating it as an error. Could configcheck be changed to allow warnings to pass? Is there already a switch I can pass to configcheck that does so? Your changes to kernel-local should still be going through when you build, if not that is absolutely a bug that needs to get fixed. The message "override" is coming from the kernel tree not the Fedora kernel tree What process_configs.sh is doing is checking to make sure all of the settings you have given will not get changed. Kconfig will silently switch the settings of options if you set things incorrectly, (switching from =y to =m or just turning options off completely) which can be confusing. The goal of these checks is to be pedantic and make sure all the values are set to what you expect. We actually want to treat all warnings as errors because even if Kconfig thinks this is a warning, the actual issue is that CONFIG_PSTORE_LZ4HC_COMPRESS_DEFAULT may not be what you expect. 1) Update the set of options you are setting to set all appropriate dependencies I tried this by setting various values in both kernel-local and in the rpmbuild/SOURCES/kernel*.config file. No dice. Next kernel I build, I'll do it in make menuconfig to see if it makes a difference. 2) Turn off the checking by building --without configchecks It looks like this is what I'll have to do, though I don't like bypassing consistency checks. Heh, my kernels have been building and running fine for years without this, so maybe it's OK. :-) If the options you've been using are working, it's probably fine to turn the checks. ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Even though I have nobuild set for architectures, rpmbuild is processing their configs. Is this correct?
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 08:08:44 -0500 Laura Abbott wrote: > On 11/24/19 1:10 PM, stan wrote: > > I build a custom local kernel using the rawhide kernel src.rpm here > > on F31. I change the spec file to build only for my arch, x86_64, > > and not to build cross headers. But I notice that the config files > > for all the nobuild archs are still processed. This seems like an > > error to me. Is it? > > > > What you are suggesting is an optimization. There's no technical issue > with running the checks on nobuild arches. If you have a patch to > not run the checks we can see about incorporating it. Yeah, it's been happening forever, but I thought that while I was asking I might as well ask about it. If it was trivial to fix, it would save a little time. Given my (lack of) understanding of spec files, I wouldn't trust any patch I could come up with, but I'll take a quick look next time I build a kernel. :-) Thanks. ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: I see this statement a lot in the kernel spec file. What is its interpretation? %if 0%{?fedora}
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 01:32:38 +
Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-11-24 at 11:04 -0700, stan wrote:
> > As the subject says, I see the %if 0%{?fedora} statement in the spec
> > file, and I thought I knew what it meant, but the latest additions
> > to the spec file have caused me to question that.
> >
> > My interpretation is that without the 0, it is checking whether it
> > is running on fedora. With the zero, it is ignoring the branch and
> > either
> > skipping the guarded statements or taking the else. Is this
> > correct?
>
> 0 is for when %{?fedora} is not defined , without 0 for example the
> build on el will fail with one scriplet syntax error.
Thanks, now I know.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Building custom kernel using rpmbuild method fails with config conflicts between kernel-local and x86_64.config
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 08:15:46 -0500 Laura Abbott wrote: > The process_configs.sh checks are designed to catch values changing > unexpecedtly the message > > override: PSTORE_LZ4HC_COMPRESS_DEFAULT changes choice state > > This indicates that some value set are now changed. This looks like > process_configs doing its job and not an actual error. It's also a > little hard to tell without seeing the full build log and what > changes you are actually making. I see two options: Then this makes the kernel-local obsolete, because the point of having a kernel-local file is to change config options from the default state. I'm making extensive changes to the config file to customize it for my system exclusively. File systems I don't use are gone. Graphics devices I don't use are gone. Ditto audio devices. Ditto network cards. etc. When I use the custom config file with make oldconfig, there are no complaints. I notice that this is a warning rather than an actual error, even though the configcheck is treating it as an error. Could configcheck be changed to allow warnings to pass? Is there already a switch I can pass to configcheck that does so? > > 1) Update the set of options you are setting to set all appropriate > dependencies I tried this by setting various values in both kernel-local and in the rpmbuild/SOURCES/kernel*.config file. No dice. Next kernel I build, I'll do it in make menuconfig to see if it makes a difference. > 2) Turn off the checking by building --without configchecks It looks like this is what I'll have to do, though I don't like bypassing consistency checks. Heh, my kernels have been building and running fine for years without this, so maybe it's OK. :-) Thanks. ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Building custom kernel using rpmbuild method fails with config conflicts between kernel-local and x86_64.config
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 01:39:24 + Sérgio Basto wrote: > I made some notes about building a custom kernel [1] that might help > you . > I recommend use mock, not rpmbuild to build a kernel > > > [1] > https://www.serjux.com/build_kernel/build_kernel.txt > Thanks, I'll keep that for future reference. There's also this: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel But I've been building custom kernels for so long using rpmbuild, I can almost do it on autopilot. I suppose it will eventually go away and I'll have to learn another method, but for now it's easier to keep using the process I know. ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Building custom kernel using rpmbuild method fails with config conflicts between kernel-local and x86_64.config
On 11/24/19 1:00 PM, stan wrote: I use the src.rpm from rawhide kernels to build a kernel custom configured for my hardware in F31, and with a local patch, using the old rpmbuild method. For rc5 this worked, when I tried rc7 it didn't. And rc8 is failing with the same error. The error message is this: scripts/gen_compile_commands.py: updating Processing /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-aarch64.config ... done Processing /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-armv7hl-lpae.config ... done Processing /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-armv7hl.config ... done Processing /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-i686.config ... done Processing /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-ppc64le.config ... done Processing /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-s390x.config ... done Processing /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-x86_64.config ... Found misconfigured config items, please set them to an appropriate value /home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-x86_64.config.orig:4359:warning: override: PSTORE_LZ4HC_COMPRESS_DEFAULT changes choice state So, kernel-local is not overriding the default kernel configuration. I think it should; so whatever is checking the configuration consistency has a bug, I think. The process_configs.sh checks are designed to catch values changing unexpecedtly the message override: PSTORE_LZ4HC_COMPRESS_DEFAULT changes choice state This indicates that some value set are now changed. This looks like process_configs doing its job and not an actual error. It's also a little hard to tell without seeing the full build log and what changes you are actually making. I see two options: 1) Update the set of options you are setting to set all appropriate dependencies 2) Turn off the checking by building --without configchecks ___ kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Even though I have nobuild set for architectures, rpmbuild is processing their configs. Is this correct?
On 11/24/19 1:10 PM, stan wrote:
I build a custom local kernel using the rawhide kernel src.rpm here on
F31. I change the spec file to build only for my arch, x86_64, and not
to build cross headers. But I notice that the config files for all the
nobuild archs are still processed. This seems like an error to me. Is
it?
What you are suggesting is an optimization. There's no technical issue
with running the checks on nobuild arches. If you have a patch to
not run the checks we can see about incorporating it.
In the kernel.spec file.
%define nobuildarches i386 i686 ppc64 s390x %{arm} %{power64} aarch64 ppc64le
Output from rpmbuild -bb kernel.spec.
Processing
/home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-aarch64.config
... done
Processing
/home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-armv7hl-lpae.config
... done
Processing
/home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-armv7hl.config
... done
Processing
/home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-i686.config
... done
Processing
/home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-ppc64le.config
... done
Processing
/home/stan/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-5.3.fc31/linux-5.4.0-0.rc8.git1.2.20191124.fc31.x86_64/configs/kernel-5.4.0-s390x.config
... done
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
