Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/2] linux-intel-rt/4.14: update to v4.14.34

These are backports to rocko. I just forgot to add the tag. --- Cal On 05/03/2018 01:07 PM, California Sullivan wrote: Also updates preempt-rt patchset to -rt27. Change from branch 4.14/yocto/base-rt to 4.14/base-rt. This is only cosmetic, the branches are exactly the same. Signed-off-by:

Re: [meta-intel] [meta-dpdk 0/3] dpdk: Add support for arm64

Merged. Worth noting is that 2/3 revealed an error in meta-intel's DPDK_TARGET_MACHINE setting and intel-corei7-64's build will be broken for a day or so while a proper default is decided. I'll also backport that default to rocko when its fixed. Thanks, Cal On 04/12/2018 10:06 PM, Kevin Hao

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/3] linux-intel/4.9: update to v4.9.84

Upon further testing, this patch has introduced a kernel BUG and likely hang with the -rt version and will not be merged. The others are still good. --- Cal On 04/12/2018 04:24 PM, California Sullivan wrote: Update from v4.9.81 stable to v4.9.84 stable. Signed-off-by: California Sullivan

Re: [meta-intel] [meta-dpdk 4/4] dpdk: Refresh the patches for the context changes

It looks like dpdk-16.04-Fix-for-misleading-indentation-error.patch is no longer necessary, as they added braces upstream. Otherwise, this set looks good and builds fine. I'll merge this and send an additional patch removing dpdk-16.04-Fix-for-misleading-indentation-error.patch. Thanks, Cal

Re: [meta-intel] [meta-dpdk][PATCH] dpdk.inc: fix missing numa.h by disabling NUMA options by default

Thanks for the feedback. v2 has been sent. Assuming no other issues are found I'll merge tomorrow. Apologies for the delays. Thanks, Cal On 04/01/2018 10:37 PM, Belal, Awais wrote: +PACKAGECONFIG[libnuma] = ",,libnuma" This dependency should be on 'numactl' which is provided under meta-oe

Re: [meta-intel] [meta-dpdk][PATCH 2/2] dpdk: merge recipe and include

Hi Awais, Kevin, In testing I ran into some compilation problems: https://pastebin.com/n8dhUmZT I was able to fix it by disabling some options, but I don't know the ramifications of these changes. In working on this I noticed most of the sed commands in that do_configure block could use a

Re: [meta-intel] Unable to install the image on the hard disk

in the first partition. What is the difference between .hddimg and .wic format. *From:*Cal Sullivan [mailto:california.l.sulli...@intel.com] *Sent:* Thursday, March 29, 2018 12:09 AM *To:* Mohammad, Jamal M <mohammadjamal.mohiud...@ncr.com>; meta-intel@yoctoproject.org *Subject:* Re: [meta

Re: [meta-intel] Unable to install the image on the hard disk

Does your board startup via EFI or legacy BIOS? Try toggling it if you can. Thanks, Cal On 03/27/2018 11:03 PM, Mohammad, Jamal M wrote: Hi Guys, 1.Created an minimal yocto image using "bitbake core-image-minimal" command 2. Flashed the USB using the dd command. sudo dd

Re: [meta-intel] [meta-dpdk][PATCH 2/2] dpdk: merge recipe and include

Is patch 1/2 good to merge? It looks like in order for 18.02 and 17.11 to use the same .inc file we will need to move the LIC_FILES_CHKSUM out of it, but that can be done later. 17.11 seems to have upstreamed the same patch that was dropped in this upgrade, so we're good on that front as

Re: [meta-intel] outdated dpdk-dev-libibverbs

Nevermind, I see you figured it out! Thanks, Cal On 03/14/2018 11:14 AM, Cal Sullivan wrote: Hmm, I'm not sure. Are you subscribed to the list? IIRC I had to manually approve your initial mail. Could be related. Thanks, Cal On 03/14/2018 04:01 AM, Belal, Awais wrote: Hi Cal, Thanks

Re: [meta-intel] outdated dpdk-dev-libibverbs

h "550 5.7.1 Unable to relay", any pointers? BR, /Awais/ -------- *From:* Cal Sullivan <california.l.sulli...@intel.com> *Sent:* Saturday, March 10, 2018 4:17 AM *To:* Belal, Awais; meta-intel@yoctoproject.or

Re: [meta-intel] galileo

Adding Stephano to CC. He's recently played with a Galileo and I think he got some of the stuff you're asking about to work on the 4.14 kernel. A couple responses inline below... On 03/11/2018 02:10 PM, Trevor Woerner wrote: Hi, I realize that the Galileo board has been completely abandoned;

Re: [meta-intel] outdated dpdk-dev-libibverbs

Hi Awais, I don't know the history of why that version of libibverbs was used instead. Considering it no longer exists, I agree that it should be changed. Unfortunately I don't have any experience and likely lack the hardware for using dpdk, so I can only go as far as making sure it builds

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] systemd-boot: fix bbappend file to suit latest version

Thanks for the patch. I assume this is needed when OE-core merges the update to v236? Thanks, Cal On 03/04/2018 06:03 PM, Chen Qi wrote: Fix the bbappend file to suit the latest systemd version. As systemd has now dropped autotools support, using ninja instead of make in do_compile.

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 2/2] conf: override WKS_FILE_DEPENDS for intel machines

I've noticed a corner case in which this causes a failure. If you set WKS_FILE = "mkefidisk.wks" manually, grub-efi does not get put in the boot partition. To make matters worse, wic does not report an error, its just silent. Thanks, Cal On 02/13/2018 03:32 AM, Anuj Mittal wrote:

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH v3] intel-vaapi-driver: upgrade to 2.0.0

Yep that fixed it. NOTE: recipe intel-vaapi-driver-2.0.0-r0: task do_configure: Succeeded Thanks, Cal On 02/06/2018 02:55 PM, Cal Sullivan wrote: I didn't. I'll try with those applied. Thanks, Cal On 02/06/2018 02:13 PM, Burton, Ross wrote: Did you also pick the oe-core updates? (not yet

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH v3] intel-vaapi-driver: upgrade to 2.0.0

Getting a strange error when building for x32: | checking for pkg-config... /home/pokybuild/yocto-autobuilder/yocto-worker/nightly-x32/build/build/tmp/work/x86_64_x32-poky-linux-gnux32/intel-vaapi-driver/2.0.0-r0/recipe-sysroot-native/usr/bin/pkg-config | configure: WARNING: using cross tools

Re: [meta-intel] menuconfig not working with rocko branch and linux-intel

pstream this patch, but that it never made it. Do either of you remember the response that it got? Thanks, Cal Still, libncurses5-dev is not needed when setting MACHINE='qemux86' instead of intel-corei7-64, which seems weird. Thanks, Max On 2018-01-23 20:48, Cal Sullivan wrote: I wa

Re: [meta-intel] menuconfig not working with rocko branch and linux-intel

I wasn't able to reproduce this with either the HEAD of rocko branches or their release tags. Could you share any changes in your local.conf and your bblayers.conf? Thanks, Cal On 01/22/2018 01:51 AM, Max Halldén wrote: Hi all, I have a project based on poky and the meta-intel layer and both

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] dpdk: Add dpdk-test to include test programs

On 01/02/2018 01:32 AM, He Zhe wrote: On 2018年01月02日 16:59, Mittal, Anuj wrote: Hi He Zhe, do_install () { @@ -113,9 +118,20 @@ do_install () { install -m 755 ${appname} ${D}/${INSTALL_PATH}/examples/`basename ${dirname}`/ done done

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/3] dpdk-dev-libibverbs: fix do_fetch failure in case of multilib

On 01/05/2018 12:20 PM, Mark Asselstine wrote: On Friday, January 5, 2018 3:17:27 PM EST Cal Sullivan wrote: This sounds like the right way to go to me. In the interim, should I take these patches in order to unblock the conflict and the multilib issue? Yes, this would help. Mark Merged

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/3] dpdk-dev-libibverbs: fix do_fetch failure in case of multilib

This sounds like the right way to go to me. In the interim, should I take these patches in order to unblock the conflict and the multilib issue? Thanks, Cal On 01/04/2018 07:24 AM, Mark Asselstine wrote: On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 2:02:31 PM EST Cal Sullivan wrote: In actually testing

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/3] dpdk-dev-libibverbs: fix do_fetch failure in case of multilib

In actually testing this patch, I noticed that I was getting a fetcher warning. After a little investigation I found that https://github.com/Mellanox/dpdk-dev-libibverbs no longer exists and we're only getting this thanks to the YP mirroring. Do you know of any other location we could point

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/3] dpdk-dev-libibverbs: fix do_fetch failure in case of multilib

These look good to me. I take it these take precedence over Mark's patch from before the break? Thanks, Cal On 01/02/2018 05:27 PM, Chen Qi wrote: Fix to correctly set SRC_URI and S to avoid do_fetch failure in case of multilib. Signed-off-by: Chen Qi ---

Re: [meta-intel] opensslfoundation.com seems to have been down for while.

: There is no SRCREV set, so during parse, bitbake queries to see if there is any new sources for the branch. The moment I changed it to GitHub, it worked. Here is the log. https://gist.github.com/pauldotknopf/b551cd42b7987f5eec01a85cb84c7d78 I am on pyro. On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Cal Sullivan

Re: [meta-intel] [meta-intel-qat][PATCH] qat: include qat17_1.0.3-42

I now have write access to meta-intel-qat and have merged this as-is since its such a minor issue and this patch has been sitting so long. Thanks, Cal On 12/07/2017 02:56 PM, Cal Sullivan wrote: See reply below. On 11/22/2017 12:27 AM, Syed Mohamad Fauzi, Syed Johan Arif wrote: Signed-off

Re: [meta-intel] [meta-intel-qat][PATCH] qat: include qat17_1.0.3-42

See reply below. On 11/22/2017 12:27 AM, Syed Mohamad Fauzi, Syed Johan Arif wrote: Signed-off-by: Syed Mohamad Fauzi, Syed Johan Arif --- recipes-extended/qat/qat17.inc | 146 +

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] linux-firmware: remove qat from linux-firmware

On 10/10/2017 07:38 AM, Wold, Saul wrote: On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 17:32 +0800, Syed Mohamad Fauzi, Syed Johan Arif wrote: removed the following qat related binary files to avoid conflict when incorporating the meta-intel-qat layer 1) qat_c3xxx_mmp.bin 2) qat_c62x.bin 3) qat_c62x_mmp.bin Is

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] linux-firmware: remove bbappend

Yep, that's a good idea. I'll send out a v2 including some comments in backport-iwlwifi. --- Cal On 09/26/2017 10:23 PM, Mikko Ylinen wrote: On 26/09/17 21:40, California Sullivan wrote: With the SRCREV bump in OE-core, all the firmware bits we need are already included so we don't need

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] Super simple secure boot implementation not requiring combo app

On 07/18/2017 01:58 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 13:32 -0700, Cal Sullivan wrote: On 07/16/2017 11:26 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Fri, 2017-07-14 at 19:11 -0700, California Sullivan wrote: I'm not sure why I never tried just signing the kernel and systemd-boot, but it works

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] uefi-comboapp.bbclass: support multiple UEFI combo apps + fixes

On 07/18/2017 12:26 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: The original code in intel-iot-refkit allows to create more than one UEFI combo app and uses that to create one for removable media and one for fixed media (after installation), with different boot=PARTUUID=xxx parameters. This way, an installed

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] Super simple secure boot implementation not requiring combo app

On 07/16/2017 11:26 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Fri, 2017-07-14 at 19:11 -0700, California Sullivan wrote: I'm not sure why I never tried just signing the kernel and systemd-boot, but it works. If either one is not signed, it causes gives a security violation error. A con of this

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] Super simple secure boot implementation not requiring combo app

+ Patrick (mistyped email address). --- Cal On 07/14/2017 07:11 PM, California Sullivan wrote: I'm not sure why I never tried just signing the kernel and systemd-boot, but it works. If either one is not signed, it causes gives a security violation error. A con of this implementation is that

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC 2/4] systemd-boot_%.bbappend: compile and deploy EFI stub

ow I'm still giving this thought. Thanks, Cal On 06/16/2017 04:39 AM, Mikko Ylinen wrote: On 14/06/17 00:37, Cal Sullivan wrote: On 06/12/2017 09:22 AM, Wold, Saul wrote: On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 18:30 -0700, California Sullivan wrote: The EFI stub can be used to directly boot a kernel + init

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC] systemd-boot_%.bbappend: Add stub command line modifications patch

This was supposed to be in reply to Patrick's comment on patch 1/4 of my previous set, but I missed a letter at the end of the message ID. Oops. --- Cal On 06/14/2017 06:47 PM, California Sullivan wrote: Allows you to modify the command line when called from EFI shell instead of the entire

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] First pass at combo app and secure boot support

On 06/13/2017 11:24 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Tue, 2017-06-13 at 14:15 -0700, Cal Sullivan wrote: On 06/12/2017 01:57 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 18:30 -0700, California Sullivan wrote: While its possible to use wic with it thanks to the uefiapp_deploy function, the init

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC 0/4] First pass at combo app and secure boot support

On 06/12/2017 01:57 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 18:30 -0700, California Sullivan wrote: While its possible to use wic with it thanks to the uefiapp_deploy function, the init scripts in the initramfs we currently ship are made for live images, and will attempt to mount and

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH RFC 1/4] systemd-boot: Add patch to systemd boot stub to fix kernel command line

On 06/13/2017 12:27 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Tue, 2017-06-13 at 10:07 +0300, Jussi Laako wrote: On 12.06.2017 19:16, Wold, Saul wrote: Is it possible this would be accepted upstream? or possibly a way to make it more acceptable upstream check for an "append" check to know it append vs

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/2] meta-tlk: merge linux-yocto_tlk.inc with bbappend

Hi Bruce, I noticed that you originally created the meta-tlk layer. Will this change conflict with anything you guys are doing? Thanks, Cal On 05/30/2017 03:04 PM, California Sullivan wrote: Only one recipe uses this .inc file, and we need to add a linux-intel bbappend that is slightly

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] README: Update information for pyro release

Woops, + the real Saul. --- Cal On 05/18/2017 01:34 PM, California Sullivan wrote: Updates several sections that contained outdated information, and adds a new "Benefits of meta-intel" section. Signed-off-by: California Sullivan --- README | 149

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] Include recommended packges for all Intel machines

On 03/21/2017 02:39 AM, Jussi Laako wrote: On 21.03.2017 01:59, Cal Sullivan wrote: The addition of kernel-modules is going to greatly increase the size of -minimal images for intel-corei7-64 and intel-core2-32, as these configurations build a lot of modules. I think it would be best to leave

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] Include recommended packges for all Intel machines

Hi Jussi, On 03/20/2017 06:08 AM, Jussi Laako wrote: Moves common MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS to a common include file and add thermald to MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. Signed-off-by: Jussi Laako --- conf/machine/include/meta-intel.inc | 3 +++

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/3] linux-yocto: Add linux-yocto 4.10 bbappends

Thanks for the info. I have sent a v2. --- Cal On 03/16/2017 03:22 PM, Alejandro Hernandez wrote: Hey Cal, That was copied directly from the recipe that had LTO, which apparently we wont be using for >4.4 so we wont be needing that line anymore. Alejandro On 03/16/2017 02:34 PM,

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/3] linux-yocto: Add linux-yocto 4.10 bbappends

Alejandro, I'd appreciate a review on the tiny bbappend, as I didn't entirely understand the EXTRA_OEMAKE that you added to the 4.9 recipe, and this is essentially a copy of that. Thanks, Cal On 03/16/2017 01:28 PM, California Sullivan wrote: Like the 4.9 linux-yocto kernel, we will just

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/8] common/binutils-2.24.51.0.3: New recipe

This one really scares me. Old version, removed CVE fixes, and might cause compatibility issues with other layers... Saul? Thanks, Cal On 02/13/2017 01:52 PM, Alejandro Hernandez wrote: This is severely hacked version of the fido binutils recipe, which is the latest binutils 2.24 recipe that

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/2] systemd-boot: use RMC database in EFI stub

Thanks for reviewing these. Since they look fine to you and my build went well I went ahead and merged them. Thanks, Cal On 02/05/2017 08:51 PM, Jianxun Zhang wrote: I noticed there are several RMC patches in mailing list and should review them tomorrow. (Just returned from a vacation)

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] linux-yocto/4.4: Fix wrong rt SRCREV for 4.4 - for real

On 01/19/2017 03:16 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: d86d58a99dd4 didn't fix the issue it wanted to address but rather referred to the corresponding commit of standard/tiny/intel/base instead of standard/preempt-rt/intel/base. A local workaround for the original meta-intel issue papered over this during

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] meta-intel: enable qemu and select more suitable virtual machine options

On 01/12/2017 06:19 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: Although the machines definitions in meta-intel are meant to target real hardware, begin able to start the resulting images under qemu is nevertheless useful for testing. Doing that via runqemu depends on a per-image runqemu.conf that describes how

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] linux-yocto/4.4: Fix wrong rt SRCREV for 4.4

Its been merged. Apologies for the delay. --- Cal On 01/11/2017 11:12 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: On 2017-01-09 22:17, Cal Sullivan wrote: I'm not sure how I managed to do that. Thanks for the patch. When will it be merged? I'd like to avoid starting to carry a workaround in our layer (meta

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] linux-yocto/4.4: Fix wrong rt SRCREV for 4.4

I'm not sure how I managed to do that. Thanks for the patch. --- Cal On 01/09/2017 01:10 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: This one refers to the merge of 4.4.26. Mistake of 371461eae450. Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka --- common/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto-rt_4.4.bbappend | 2

Re: [meta-intel] [yocto] [meta-inte][rmc][PATCH v2 1/1] rmc: add support for alternative EFI bootloaders

On 12/15/2016 10:23 AM, Todor Minchev wrote: On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 10:09 -0800, Cal Sullivan wrote: On 12/13/2016 04:50 PM, Todor Minchev wrote: On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 16:22 -0800, Jianxun Zhang wrote: On Dec 13, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Todor Minchev <todor.minchev@linux .intel.com> wrote

Re: [meta-intel] [yocto] [meta-inte][rmc][PATCH v2 1/1] rmc: add support for alternative EFI bootloaders

On 12/13/2016 04:50 PM, Todor Minchev wrote: On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 16:22 -0800, Jianxun Zhang wrote: On Dec 13, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Todor Minchev wrote: RMC was previously configured to work only with the systemd-boot EFI bootloader. With this commit we can

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] galileodisk-sd.wks: Add rootwait

Works for me. On 11/22/2016 01:58 PM, Saul Wold wrote: Adding rootwait to the kernel params in order to handle the fact that 4.8 boots faster and older SD cards are not ready in time for the kernel to correctly mount. [YOCTO #10709] Signed-off-by: Saul Wold Tested-by:

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH] meta-intel: Enable RMC by default

On 10/17/2016 03:02 PM, Saul Wold wrote: This enables the Runtime Machine Configuration feature, which allows use to support multiple machines that have different kernel commandline option as well as different startup requirements to work from the base MACHINE configuration. Signed-off-by:

Re: [meta-intel] standard/intel/base revisions

+ Bruce again. I somehow dropped him a few emails back. Pretty important information about the old and new standard/intel/base branches diverging. --- Cal On 10/03/2016 02:20 PM, Cal Sullivan wrote: On 10/03/2016 02:10 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Mon, 2016-10-03 at 12:59 -0700, Cal Sullivan

Re: [meta-intel] standard/intel/base revisions

On 10/03/2016 02:10 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Mon, 2016-10-03 at 12:59 -0700, Cal Sullivan wrote: My local linux-yocto-4.4 branch was at that commit ID, and after doing a git fetch and git status I see the following: [clsulliv@clsulliv linux-yocto-4.4]$ git st On branch standard/intel/base

Re: [meta-intel] standard/intel/base revisions

+ Bruce I also can't find that revision on the remote branch... --- Cal On 10/02/2016 08:24 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Sat, 2016-10-01 at 13:49 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: Hello! I'm getting the following error when trying to build for intel-corei7-64: ERROR:

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/2] linux-yocto/4.4: Bump SRCREVs from v4.4.18 to v4.4.20

Yep, sorry about that. I had a patch in my queue to fix this, but hadn't gotten around to it yet. Sent it off just now. Thanks, Cal On 09/22/2016 11:31 AM, Trevor Woerner wrote: On Mon 2016-09-12 @ 02:38:04 PM, California Sullivan wrote: From linux-yocto-4.4: ---

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 1/2] intel-corei7-64: add machine configurations specific to leafhill bsp

On 09/06/2016 10:43 AM, Saul Wold wrote: On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 14:18 +0800, Rebecca Chang Swee Fun wrote: We would like to enable new BSP for Intel Atom E3900 SoC based platforms. This will help us to consolidate BSP into intel-common and we can use KERNEL_FEATURES to select target BSP to

Re: [meta-intel] [PATCH 0/2] linux-yocto SRCREV update 9/1

with the new kernel tools for core2 and corei7, and updates the 4.1 kernel to v4.1.30. No new errors or warning were revealed in my normal smoke testing, and as usual the patches are also available at my branch here: git://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-intel-contrib -b clsulliv/master-test Thanks, Cal