[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH v4 0/9] iMX6Q BSP 1.1.0 upgrade
Otavio Salvador
otavio at ossystems.com.br
Tue Feb 26 09:39:18 PST 2013
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Thomas Senyk
<thomas.senyk at pelagicore.com> wrote:
> On Fri, February 15, 2013 16:23:42 Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Thomas Senyk
>>
>> <thomas.senyk at pelagicore.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, February 13, 2013 19:11:59 Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Thomas Senyk
>> >>
>> >> <thomas.senyk at pelagicore.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, February 12, 2013 19:59:45 Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> >> > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Otavio Salvador
>> >> > >
>> >> > > <otavio at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> >> > > > Hello,
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > This patch series upgrades the iMX6Q BSP to 1.1.0; it also try to
>> >> > > > fix
>> >> > > > the DRI support for it.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Please give it a try as this is a huge upgrade and we might have
>> >> > > > regressions and pending issues still unkown. This series depends on
>> >> > > > a
>> >> > > > cuple of patches I sent to OpenEmbeeded-Core mailing list for
>> >> > > > xserver-xorg and mesa, please apply them before playing with this
>> >> > > > series.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I've created a bundle for this series:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > OE-Core/Poky patches:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > http://patches.openembedded.org/bundle/otavio/oe-core-dri-patches/
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Meta-FSL-ARM patches:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > http://patches.openembedded.org/bundle/otavio/bsp-1.1.0-update/
>> >> >
>> >> > Nice thanks for the bundle.
>> >> >
>> >> > Most of my issues got fixed in v4! good job! :)
>> >> >
>> >> > The left overs:
>> >> >
>> >> > 1. After applied the upstream patches I got:
>> >> >
>> >> > ERROR: No recipes available for:
>> >> > /home/tsenyk/projects/oe-yocto/fsl-community-bsp/sources/meta-fsl-
>> >> >
>> >> > arm/recipes-graphics/mesa/mesa-dri_9.0.1.bbappend
>> >> > ERROR: Command execution failed: Exited with 1
>> >> >
>> >> > ... their is probably just some patch missing or something .. I just
>> >> > deleted it and it was good ;)
>> >> > I don't care that much about this one :) (I just wanted to report this)
>> >>
>> >> Yes. I will check if we need to keep the bbappend or it is safe to drop
>> >> it.
>> >>
>> >> > 2. The deploy and symlinks in the image look very good now:
>> >> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Feb 13 17:49 libEGL.so -> libEGL-fb.so
>> >> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 803326 Feb 13 17:33 libGAL-fb.so
>> >> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Feb 13 17:49 libGAL.so -> libGAL-fb.so
>> >> >
>> >> > nice!
>> >>
>> >> Not that nice; in fact we shoudln't have the symlinks or X11 things
>> >> might end linking against framebuffer libraries by mistake.
>> >
>> > This sounds rather unconventional ;)
>> > I've never seen any platform were libEGL-something.so is the EGL target to
>> > link to.
>> >
>> > In general one should define the default flavor of the GPU-driver
>> >
>> > ... which is setting the libEGL.so symblink.
>>
>> For this the alternatives system might be a solution for the target.
>> The problem is what to do during the build of applications. Think in
>> such case:
>>
>> - gpu-viv is build
>> - app-fb is build
>> - app-x11 is build
>>
>> If we have libEGL.so how we manage to link each to the right one?
>
> Why would you support this anyway?
> Having two EGL versions on your system/sysroot at the same time sounds wrong
> doesn't it?
At runtime, I agree but not at build time.
> I'd say it depends on your DISTRO_FEATURES and you need to choice either
> linuxfb, directfb or x11.
> ...and the rules are something like:
> - is x11 in your DISTRO_FEATURES? => x11 version of drivers
> - if not, is directfb in your DISTRO_FEATURES? => egl version of drivers
> - if not: linuxfb version of drivers
But distro features does not mean "enforce X11 use" but "allow X11
use" so it seems we should support fb use even with X11 feature
enabled.
> <side note>
> Besides that: You need to solve the "link to the right one" anyway, if you
> have libEGL.so or not. (Although I admit it's more likely to cause problems if
> you have it)
> <\side note>
>
>>
>> > In relation to the "link by mistake"-argument:
>> > a) You have a fb-only setup: there will be no x11-things.
>> > b) You have a x11 setup: the default is libEGL-x11.so and theirfor no
>> > problem.>
>> > ... if on a x11 setup a application want to explicitly link against
>> >
>> > libEGL-fb.so it can do anyway, but at least the default on is set.
>> > c) You have a dfb setup: the default link goes to libEGL-dfb.so
>>
>> This works well for runtime and I fully agree.
>>
>> I am concerned about how we will manage it at *build* time. Bear on
>> mind that app-fb and app-x11 can be build in parallel so change the
>> link during the build is not going to work.
>
> again: why support 2 build targets in the same sysroot?
Read above.
>> > How do applications within the yocto build link against libEGL?
>> > There are generally no .pc file for GPU-drivers
>> >
>> > ... are there internal variables to reference?
>>
>> You may need to patch the application to link to one or another. Or
>> play with LDFLAGS...
>
> That sounds intense...this would mean that one HW-layer (meta-fsl-arm) tries
> to invent/enforce a new way of building application for everybody(?)?
> Not sure this will thrive ;)
Well, the "right" way of deal with it is to have a library which loads
the right backend libraries depending if you're running in X11 or not.
Besides it is not new way but a explicit build flag ... not that bad.
>> >> > Also the deploy in the sysroot looks good (only libEGL-fb.so and non of
>> >> > the
>> >> > others are present) .... so the file-split is working, but there are no
>> >> > symblinks.
>> >> >
>> >> > I tried to fix this by creating symlinks manually in do_install:
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/recipes-graphics/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q.inc
>> >> > b/recipes- graphics/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q.inc
>> >> > index 9818c72..af6dc82 100644
>> >> > --- a/recipes-graphics/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q.inc
>> >> > +++ b/recipes-graphics/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q/gpu-viv-bin-mx6q.inc
>> >> > @@ -91,6 +91,20 @@ do_install () {
>> >> >
>> >> > ${D}${libdir}/libGAL.so \
>> >> > ${D}${libdir}/libVIVANTE.so
>> >> >
>> >> > + if [ "${KEEP_XLIBS}" = "yes" ]; then
>> >> > + ln -s ${D}${libdir}/libEGL-x11.so ${D}${libdir}/libEGL.so
>> >> > + ln -s ${D}${libdir}/libGAL-x11.so ${D}${libdir}/libGAL.so
>> >> > + ln -s ${D}${libdir}/libVIVANTE-x11.so
>> >> > ${D}${libdir}/libVIVANTE.so
>> >> > + elif [ "${KEEP_DFBLIBS}" = "yes" ]; then
>> >> > + ln -s ${D}${libdir}/libEGL-dfb.so ${D}${libdir}/libEGL.so
>> >> > + ln -s ${D}${libdir}/libGAL-dfb.so ${D}${libdir}/libGAL.so
>> >> > + ln -s ${D}${libdir}/libVIVANTE-dfb.so
>> >> > ${D}${libdir}/libVIVANTE.so
>> >> > + else
>> >> > + ln -s libEGL-fb.so ${D}${libdir}/libEGL.so
>> >> > + ln -s libGAL-fb.so ${D}${libdir}/libGAL.so
>> >> > + ln -s libVIVANTE-fb.so ${D}${libdir}/libVIVANTE.so
>> >> > + fi
>> >> > +
>> >> >
>> >> > find ${D}${libdir} -type f -exec chmod 644 {} \;
>> >> > find ${D}${includedir} -type f -exec chmod 644 {} \;
>> >> >
>> >> > }
>> >>
>> >> Read obove...
>> >>
>> >> > I have absolutely NO idea if this is in anyway the right thing to do!
>> >> > I had errors, bitbake complaining about .so files not part of the -dev
>> >> > package ... but for some reason I don't get those anymore after I
>> >> > removed
>> >> > all of my other changes and just kept the 'ln -s'-lines ... so:
>> >> > If you think it the right way, just take it and submit v5 and/or commit
>> >> > it
>> >> > after v4 is merged.
>> >>
>> >> No; it is not.
>> >
>> > Because of the above or because the way I set the symlinks is wrong?
>>
>> Your code is right the problem is the concurrent build as explained above.
>>
>> >> > 3. I still got the following errors when starting any Qt5 application:
>> >> >
>> >> > vertex shader compilation error:
>> >> > fragment shader compilation error:
>> >> > program link error: No vertex shader attached.
>> >> >
>> >> > My setup: I do a image of my own, the main(!) contents of the image is:
>> >> > inherit core-image
>> >> > IMAGE_INSTALL += "libpng tslib libudev gpu-viv-bin-mx6q"
>> >> > IMAGE_FEATURES += "ssh-server-openssh tools-debug"
>> >> > DEPENDS = "gpu-viv-bin-mx6q libpng"
>> >> >
>> >> > Then I compile Qt5 git from outside of yocto, my configure line:
>> >> > ../qt5/configure -opensource -confirm-license -make libs -device imx6
>> >> > -device- option
>> >> > CROSS_COMPILE=~/projects/oe-yocto/fsl-community-bsp/imx6-
>> >> > build-10/tmp/sysroots/x86_64-linux/usr/bin/armv7a-vfp-neon-poky-linux-
>> >> > gnueabi/arm-poky-linux-gnueabi- -sysroot
>> >> > ~/projects/oe-yocto/fsl-community-
>> >> > bsp/imx6-build-10/tmp/sysroots/imx6qsabrelite -prefix
>> >> > /opt/pelagicore/Qt5.0- yocto-imx6-10 -opengl es2 -no-pch -v
>> >>
>> >> This might be the cause of the problem. We need to build it using
>> >> Yocto toolchain so it links with proper library names or we raise the
>> >> errors we need to deal with. Can you give it a try?
>> >>
>> >> > This way I've compiled Qt5 against yocto builds for a while now.
>> >> > The only related problem I had in the past was the '#define mediump vs.
>> >> > heighp' which I could solve a patching Qt.
>> >> > This isn't helping anymore ... but I'm still investigating.
>> >>
>> >> Please check if you can build against the toolchain. To generate the
>> >> toolchain for your image do:
>> >>
>> >> bitbake <image> -c populate_sdk
>> >
>> > I already use the yocto toolchain and sysroot ... I think? ;)
>> > I'll checkout what does '-c populate_sdk' as soon as I find some time (I
>> > guess week after next week)
>>
>> Right; if I find the need time I will try to play with it as well.
Did you try the sdk?
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio at ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
More information about the meta-freescale
mailing list