[yocto] [PATCH] yocto-bsp: Fix QEMUARM based bsps to not offer SMP support

[Khem Raj]

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Alejandro Hernandez
<alejandro.hernandez at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 01:46 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Alejandro Hernandez
>> <alejandro.hernandez at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Andy,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05/30/2017 05:32 PM, Andre McCurdy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Alejandro Hernandez
>>>> <alejandro.hernandez at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey Leo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, this change only applies to qemuARM, the other ARM based BSPs are
>>>>> based on > ARMv6
>>>>>
>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 05/30/2017 02:59 PM, Leonardo Sandoval wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alex,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> is this change only applies to qemu arm? I wonder if the native arm
>>>>>> arch
>>>>>> needs a similar series.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Leo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 11:44 -0700, Alejandro Hernandez wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The SMP kernel config presents issues on qemuarm because:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CONFIG_SMP=y
>>>>>>> Dependencies Missing:
>>>>>>>     - CPU_V6K or CPU_V7:
>>>>>>>       These are selected by setting:
>>>>>>>       CONFIG_ARCH_MULTI_V7=y
>>>>>>>       or
>>>>>>>       CONFIG_ARCH_MULTI_V6=y
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But our QEMU + ARM BSPs are based on armv4/v5 hence they are
>>>>>>> incompatible with CONFIG_SMP.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe time to think (again) about updating OE's qemu ARM builds to
>>>> ARMv7.
>>>
>>> I believe qemu has deep issues with newer ARMs, and thats why it's been
>>> kept like that.
>>
>>
>> Qemu itself should be fine with the newer ARMs .. but we've just targeted
>> a
>> lowest common
>> denominator (and simple) ARM arch for this target. Since the primary goal
>> isn't testing the ISA or arch
>> specifics via qemuarm/qemuarm64 (rather, sanity, base arch support, etc).
>>
>
> I think it will be more effective if we tested most used configuration
> instead, it would help a larger community. GCC 7 also dropped armv5 ( the t
> variants are still supported )
>
> I would think keep the name qemuarm but use armv7 based machine to emulate
> would be an option I am sure meta Linaro has some work on this that can be
> used in oe core
>
>
> I would also assume they've got some work on this, it'd be nice to contact
> them and see if this can be done, although I asked on IRC several times to
> see what people thoughts were on if we should upgrade and I practically got
> no feedback.

http://git.linaro.org/openembedded/meta-linaro.git/tree/meta-aarch64/conf/machine

http://git.linaro.org/openembedded/meta-linaro.git/tree/meta-linaro/conf/machine

looks at genericarm* conf files.