From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 27692E009B9; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:06:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, high * trust * [192.55.52.115 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C65E00961 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:06:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=intel; t=1490893578; x=1522429578; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=w3QbfBSDKR7BADV5LyGQeiqRlVEcpKZ4yBc8wrQP2Ig=; b=hRohlvPtOqLF8oLdlqhR4Vcob/73JIMIcWi+OGzOw3o9TAD2kU7Q1KtJ zYp4tadL5Eb30NoxAj8EHrTO6gIy0g==; Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Mar 2017 10:06:17 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,247,1486454400"; d="scan'208";a="82391398" Received: from lsandov1-mobl2.zpn.intel.com ([10.219.128.141]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Mar 2017 10:06:17 -0700 Message-ID: <1490894066.17259.57.camel@linux.intel.com> From: Leonardo Sandoval To: Saul Wold Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:14:26 -0600 In-Reply-To: <1490892970-11447-1-git-send-email-sgw@linux.intel.com> References: <1490892970-11447-1-git-send-email-sgw@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386 machine.cfg: Explicitly disable 64BIT X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:06:20 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2017-03-30 at 09:56 -0700, Saul Wold wrote: > Since we do not set the 64 bit flags, newer kernels seem to build 64bit > config files by default. This is due to a hard-coded uname -m check that > selects the KBUILD_DEFCONFIG based on the host, not the cross target. > Saul, this is poky code, so wrong list. > Similar to e9ec769926b2378e63380bd7762ce7ce201af151 in the yocto-kernel-cache repo > > [YOCTO #11230] > > Signed-off-by: Saul Wold > --- > .../substrate/target/arch/i386/recipes-kernel/linux/files/machine.cfg | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/scripts/lib/bsp/substrate/target/arch/i386/recipes-kernel/linux/files/machine.cfg b/scripts/lib/bsp/substrate/target/arch/i386/recipes-kernel/linux/files/machine.cfg > index 3b168b7..fe5b882 100644 > --- a/scripts/lib/bsp/substrate/target/arch/i386/recipes-kernel/linux/files/machine.cfg > +++ b/scripts/lib/bsp/substrate/target/arch/i386/recipes-kernel/linux/files/machine.cfg > @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@ > # yocto-bsp-filename {{=machine}}.cfg > CONFIG_X86_32=y > +# Must explicitly disable 64BIT > +# CONFIG_64BIT is not set > + > CONFIG_MATOM=y > CONFIG_PRINTK=y > > -- > 2.7.4 >