[yocto] Question / issue

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 14-05-09 01:14 AM, Paul McGougan wrote:
>
> Hi all.
>
> We are currently using Poky 1.5.0.
>
> We have created our own custom layer for our powerpc-based board.
>
> We are running u-boot as our bootloader and want to use the new FIT 
> (FDT) style kernel/dtb image blob.
>
> To that end, in our custom layer we have a file 
> poky/meta-OURS/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_3.10.bbappend, and in 
> that file I have a function do_install_append() in which I call 
> u-boot's mkimage passing it the kernel and DTB files that we want 
> stored in the FIT image that we will use to boot from u-boot.
>
> My first question is, is there a better place to be making the FIT image?
>

It depends on if everything you need to construct the FIT image is
in the kernel's build directory, or also available in the sysroot/deploy
directories.

If you need kernel build artifacts, doing it in the bbappend (or a .inc,
.bbclass, etc) of the kernel recipe is the right place.

> As a side-question to that, I was surprised that there isn't native 
> support already for creating this type of u-boot image considering how 
> useful it is, does anyone know if there is a specific reason no one 
> has done this yet?
>

None that I know of (but I haven't checked all the SDK, vendor
and distro layers in the ecosystem).

Either a image_types bbclass or something like the existing linux-dtb.inc
could fill the roll. It just depends on what is needed to build the uImage.

> Secondly, (and this is our main issue) I have found that by adding the 
> do_install_append function, even if it is completely empty, whenever I 
> try to bitbake anything that depends on the kernel, that bitbake 
> always re-runs the kernel install stage, even when there have been no 
> changes. Literally I can run a bitbake, then run the same bitbake 
> command again, and both times the kernel install stage gets run (this 
> is a problem because it takes a long time to run). It appears to be 
> happening because the stampfile is not found every time (the hash 
> appears to be wrong). Is this a bug? Is there a fix or work-around for 
> this problem?
>

In this front, I'm not the best reference. Checking the sstate signature
might help, it should show which variables are being used .. and possibly
invalidating the signature, triggering the steps to run again.

Bruce

> Thanks.
>
> Paul.
>
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This message (including attachments) is a 
> private communication solely for use of the intended recipient(s). If 
> you are not the intended recipient(s) or believe you received this 
> message in error, notify the sender immediately and then delete this 
> message. Any other use, retention, dissemination or copying is 
> prohibited and may be a violation of law, including the Electronic 
> Communication Privacy Act of 1986."   ­­
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/attachments/20140509/edaabfa5/attachment.html>