[yocto] perl 5.22 and 32 bit targets

Wed Mar 23 04:43:20 PDT 2016

> Am 23.03.2016 um 12:05 schrieb Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc.com>:
> 
> On 2016-03-23 10:48, Jens Rehsack wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 23.03.2016 um 10:14 schrieb Jens Rehsack <rehsack at gmail.com>:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Am 23.03.2016 um 10:09 schrieb Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc.com>:
>>>> 
>>>> On 2016-03-23 09:57, Jens Rehsack wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 23.03.2016 um 09:40 schrieb Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc.com>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2016-03-23 09:09, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2016-03-23 06:36, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I hope this is the correct place to discuss this problem.  It
>>>>>>>>> is all about a difference in behavior between a program built
>>>>>>>>> using bitbake/OE (only OE-core is needed) vs building the program
>>>>>>>>> on the target hardware itself.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I've been struggling with this problem since perl was upgraded
>>>>>>>>> to version 5.22.  I'm working on Amanda (Advanced Maryland Archive
>>>>>>>>> tool) which is written primarily in perl and uses swig interfaces
>>>>>>>>> to access native C functions.  This code works great when using
>>>>>>>>> the previous perl (5.20.x) but fails on all 32 bit targets with
>>>>>>>>> perl 5.22
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The interesting thing is that if I build Amanda on my target
>>>>>>>>> directly (using SDK tools), it works perfectly even with perl
>>>>>>>>> 5.22, so it seems that there is some [subtle] difference between
>>>>>>>>> building using bitbake/OE than when built on the self-hosted
>>>>>>>>> target.  I've compared the builds and the only thing I could
>>>>>>>>> find (from the output of configure) is a difference in sizeof(off_t)
>>>>>>>>> Sadly, when I tried to adjust this in the OE build, it didn't
>>>>>>>>> make any difference, but perhaps I didn't make this change
>>>>>>>>> correctly or completely.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> do you have largefile support turned on ? if you do then it might
>>>>>>>> be detecting it wrongly during configure since we cache it to a
>>>>>>>> non-largefile case
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> so try to add something like
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> EXTRA_OECONF += "${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'largefile',
>>>>>>>> 'ac_cv_sizeof_off_t=8', '', d)}"
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> while building perl or the affected program and see if that helps
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks for the idea, but that didn't help.  I also forced some CFLAGS
>>>>>>> to match, in particular:
>>>>>>>  -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
>>>>>>> but this didn't make any difference either.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On a whim I just tried a little experiment where I took the *.o files
>>>>>> from the perl subdirectory (where all the swig shims live) from a working
>>>>>> (self-hosted) build and moved them to my bitbake/OE build.  I then touched
>>>>>> all the *.o and *.lo files in the perl tree to force a relink. I then ran
>>>>>> % bitbake amanda -C compile && bitbake core-image-base
>>>>>> to my surprise, amanda works!  So the culprit lies somewhere within the
>>>>>> swig generated glue.  I've tried comparing these files before and I didn't
>>>>>> find anything other than cosmetic differences (mostly comments about the
>>>>>> name of the file processed, etc).  I've added this subtree to "results"
>>>>>> in my github layer in case someone can see what might be relevant.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Any ideas what might be different and make this swig generated glue fail?
>>>>>> Note that the swig interface files are rebuilt as part of the build process
>>>>>> and both bitbake/OE and self-hosted are using the same swig version.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I digged a bit through your layer (while my up2date scanner over meta-cpan
>>>>> blocks my build chain :P) and realized that you use perl-5.20.0 as it was
>>>>> in poky. A "simple" downgrade would be more reasonable ... if reason applys
>>>>> here in general :)
>>>> 
>>>> In practice, I am doing that.  However, I want to understand why perl 5.22
>>>> breaks things and get it fixed.
>>> 
>>> I did a diff between your 5.20 and poky's 5.22 and realize some fixes applied
>>> in 5.22 regarding library path's aren't applied in your copy. Maybe swig relies
>>> on wrong library locations and when we know, we can fix.
>>> 
>>> So it's maybe not a 5.20 vs. 5.22 problem, it's maybe a weird swig setup problem.
>>> 
>>>>> When you fail on cross-build and succeed in target build, try to compare the
>>>>> C files and includes (even swig libraries) used.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It smells more like a "wrong source" than a "perl problem" (and even when
>>>>> I never would read any python thread, the same problem would likely occur
>>>>> there, too ^^).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Which perl headers are used in your build? To dig down, more logs would
>>>>> be reasonable ...
>>>> 
>>>> Everything comes from the same sources, same revisions, etc, as I'm using
>>>> either a bitbake/OE build or the embedded (self-hosted) version from the
>>>> same build plus SDK tools.
>>> 
>>> And your SDK does not include any host tools? Did you prove the intermediate
>>> amanda build files (eg. generated by SWIG) for relicts from wrong source?
>>> Did you check the logs which include directories had been used?
>> 
>> I give it a quick shot and got:
>> 
>> ../../arm-poky-linux-gnueabi-libtool  --tag=CC   --mode=compile arm-poky-linux-gnueabi-gcc  -march=armv7-a -marm  -mthumb-interwork -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon -mtune=cortex-a9 --sysroot=/homes/sno/fsl-release-bsp/ornithologen-kann-man-mit-voegeln-eine-freude-machen/tmp/sysroots/curie -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../config -I../../common-src -I../../common-src -I../../xfer-src -I../../gnulib -I../../ndmp-src -I/homes/sno/fsl-release-bsp/ornithologen-kann-man-mit-voegeln-eine-freude-machen/tmp/sysroots/x86_64-linux/usr/lib/perl-native/perl/5.22.1/CORE   -fno-strict-aliasing -D_GNU_SOURCE -pthread -I/homes/sno/fsl-release-bsp/ornithologen-kann-man-mit-voegeln-eine-freude-machen/tmp/sysroots/curie/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/homes/sno/fsl-release-bsp/ornithologen-kann-man-mit-voegeln-eine-freude-machen/tmp/sysroots/curie/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -DSWIG  -O2 -pipe -g -feliminate-unused-debug-types -fipa-pta -ftree-partial-pre -ftree-loop-distribution -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns -fgcse-afte
> r
> -reload -fgcse-sm -fgcse-las  -fno-strict-aliasing  -c -o xferwrap.lo xferwrap.c
>> 
>> Do you see the "-I/homes/sno/fsl-release-bsp/ornithologen-kann-man-mit-voegeln-eine-freude-machen/tmp/sysroots/x86_64-linux/usr/lib/perl-native/perl/5.22.1/CORE" ?
>> 
>> Any further blames of perl-5.22? :)
> 
> I'm not sure what you are getting at here.  Indeed it is supposed to be
> using perl-5.22.1 for everything.  The version 5.22.0 in meta-amanda layer
> is just for testing and should not be used at the moment.

Please compare word wise ...

-I/homes/sno/fsl-release-bsp/ornithologen-kann-man-mit-voegeln-eine-freude-machen/tmp/sysroots/x86_64-linux/usr/lib/perl-native/perl/5.22.1/CORE
-I/homes/sno/fsl-release-bsp/ornithologen-kann-man-mit-voegeln-eine-freude-machen/tmp/sysroots/curie/usr/include/glib-2.0

Probably this helps getting my point:

$ ls -l tmp/work
total 149
drwxrwxr-x  54 sno sno  54 Mar 22 23:49 all-poky-linux
drwxrwxr-x 269 sno sno 269 Mar 22 23:49 arm926ejse-poky-linux-gnueabi
drwxrwxr-x   3 sno sno   3 Mar 22 23:48 bohr-nand-poky-linux-gnueabi
drwxrwxr-x  19 sno sno  19 Mar 22 23:49 bohr-poky-linux-gnueabi
drwxrwxr-x   9 sno sno   9 Mar 22 21:38 cortexa9hf-vfp-neon-mx6qdl-poky-linux-gnueabi
drwxrwxr-x 326 sno sno 326 Mar 23 11:28 cortexa9hf-vfp-neon-poky-linux-gnueabi
drwxrwxr-x   3 sno sno   3 Mar 22 21:37 curie-emmc-poky-linux-gnueabi
drwxrwxr-x  29 sno sno  29 Mar 22 21:50 curie-poky-linux-gnueabi
drwxrwxr-x 196 sno sno 196 Mar 23 11:28 x86_64-linux

> All of my comparisons and testing (see instructions in the README) are
> for perl-5.22.1 only and in fact I've only been using the bits from bitbake/OE
> and not building that any more (I found that it wasn't necessary - one only
> needs to build amanda on the target)
> 
> Sorry for the confusion.

Cheers
--
Jens Rehsack - rehsack at gmail.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/attachments/20160323/fbb90f75/attachment.pgp>