Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Glenn Schmottlach]

I am having trouble modifying the kernel configuration for the
following TI kernel recipe using the Yocto Morty environment:

linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bb

I have created my own layer and with a *.bbappend file for this recipe, e.g.

linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bbappend

It appears the TI kernel recipes are not (yet) proper "Yocto" kernel
recipes in that they are not "fragment" aware. It appears I cannot do
the following inside of my *.bbappend recipe:

FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
SRC_URI += "file://eem.cfg"

Inside of "eem.cfg" I want to set the following kernel options:

CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y

This has no affect. I tried creating my own defconfig based on the
'.config' generated from the original recipe. I modified my *.bbappend
file as follows:

FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
SRC_URI += "file://defconfig"

Again, my defconfig is not applied to the build.

I even tried patching kernel-source/ti_config_fragments and placing a
eem.cfg in that directory hoping the configuration generation script
(defconfig_builder.sh) might apply this fragment.

FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
SRC_URI += "file://0001-eem-config.patch"

Where the patch contains:

Index: kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
===================================================================
--- /dev/null
+++ kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
+CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
+CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
+

Unfortunately this did not work either.

I suspect this question has been asked before, but what is the
RECOMMENDED procedure for making kernel configuration changes to the
TI kernel recipes in a Yocto environment? What methods have others
used to tweak the TI kernel options from their *.bbappend files?

Thanks for any insights . . .

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Florian Wickert]

You are right, it does not inherit the yocto linux bbclass.
Try setting this in your bbappend file:
KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS_append = " ${WORKDIR}/eem.cfg"

Regards,
Florian


On 03/20/2017 04:44 PM, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> I am having trouble modifying the kernel configuration for the
> following TI kernel recipe using the Yocto Morty environment:
>
> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bb
>
> I have created my own layer and with a *.bbappend file for this recipe, e.g.
>
> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bbappend
>
> It appears the TI kernel recipes are not (yet) proper "Yocto" kernel
> recipes in that they are not "fragment" aware. It appears I cannot do
> the following inside of my *.bbappend recipe:
>
> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> SRC_URI += "file://eem.cfg"
>
> Inside of "eem.cfg" I want to set the following kernel options:
>
> CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
> CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
> CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
>
> This has no affect. I tried creating my own defconfig based on the
> '.config' generated from the original recipe. I modified my *.bbappend
> file as follows:
>
> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> SRC_URI += "file://defconfig"
>
> Again, my defconfig is not applied to the build.
>
> I even tried patching kernel-source/ti_config_fragments and placing a
> eem.cfg in that directory hoping the configuration generation script
> (defconfig_builder.sh) might apply this fragment.
>
> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> SRC_URI += "file://0001-eem-config.patch"
>
> Where the patch contains:
>
> Index: kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
> +CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
> +CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
> +CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
> +
>
> Unfortunately this did not work either.
>
> I suspect this question has been asked before, but what is the
> RECOMMENDED procedure for making kernel configuration changes to the
> TI kernel recipes in a Yocto environment? What methods have others
> used to tweak the TI kernel options from their *.bbappend files?
>
> Thanks for any insights . . .

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:44:16AM -0400, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> I am having trouble modifying the kernel configuration for the
> following TI kernel recipe using the Yocto Morty environment:
> 
> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bb
> 
> I have created my own layer and with a *.bbappend file for this recipe, e.g.
> 
> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bbappend
> 
> It appears the TI kernel recipes are not (yet) proper "Yocto" kernel
> recipes in that they are not "fragment" aware.

TI kernel recipe is not "Yocto" kernel (which is really to say WindRiver 
format), but the fragment support got upstreamed to the mainline kernel and 
kernel itself now supports config fragments! That is what TI kernel uses and 
meta-ti kernel recipe supports.


> It appears I cannot do
> the following inside of my *.bbappend recipe:
> 
> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> SRC_URI += "file://eem.cfg"

You can add any additional fragments you want to be applied by the recipe to 
KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS variable.


> Inside of "eem.cfg" I want to set the following kernel options:
> 
> CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
> CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
> CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
> 
> This has no affect. I tried creating my own defconfig based on the
> '.config' generated from the original recipe. I modified my *.bbappend
> file as follows:
> 
> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> SRC_URI += "file://defconfig"
> 
> Again, my defconfig is not applied to the build.

It already has file://defconfig in SRC_URI, that's how it works and gets the 
fragments assembled.

What's your platform? Are you sure one of the existing defconfigs are not 
used instead?


> I even tried patching kernel-source/ti_config_fragments and placing a
> eem.cfg in that directory hoping the configuration generation script
> (defconfig_builder.sh) might apply this fragment.
> 
> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> SRC_URI += "file://0001-eem-config.patch"
> 
> Where the patch contains:
> 
> Index: kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
> +CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
> +CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
> +CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
> +
> 
> Unfortunately this did not work either.

You also need to update the "map" file, which basically lists all the 
fragments it needs to assemble for a platform. And platform's defconfig only 
points to one of the entries in the map file.


> I suspect this question has been asked before, but what is the
> RECOMMENDED procedure for making kernel configuration changes to the
> TI kernel recipes in a Yocto environment? What methods have others
> used to tweak the TI kernel options from their *.bbappend files?
> 
> Thanks for any insights . . .
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> meta-ti mailing list
> meta-ti@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Glenn Schmottlach]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:44:16AM -0400, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
>> I am having trouble modifying the kernel configuration for the
>> following TI kernel recipe using the Yocto Morty environment:
>>
>> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bb
>>
>> I have created my own layer and with a *.bbappend file for this recipe, e.g.
>>
>> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bbappend
>>
>> It appears the TI kernel recipes are not (yet) proper "Yocto" kernel
>> recipes in that they are not "fragment" aware.
>
> TI kernel recipe is not "Yocto" kernel (which is really to say WindRiver
> format), but the fragment support got upstreamed to the mainline kernel and
> kernel itself now supports config fragments! That is what TI kernel uses and
> meta-ti kernel recipe supports.
>

Thanks for that clarification. I wasn't aware of the two "flavors" of
fragment support. It certainly would be nice if a consistent approach
(between Yocto and the Kernel) could be adopted. I suspect this will
be sorted out in time.

>> It appears I cannot do
>> the following inside of my *.bbappend recipe:
>>
>> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
>> SRC_URI += "file://eem.cfg"
>
> You can add any additional fragments you want to be applied by the recipe to
> KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS variable.
>
>

This what I ultimately did . . . appended a fully qualified path to my
fragment to the KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS variable. As a suggestion,
this might be something useful to include in the README for the
meta-ti layer. I suspect others might have a similar need to modify
the kernel configuration and once described, it (now) seems
straightforward.

>> Inside of "eem.cfg" I want to set the following kernel options:
>>
>> CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
>> CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
>> CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
>>
>> This has no affect. I tried creating my own defconfig based on the
>> '.config' generated from the original recipe. I modified my *.bbappend
>> file as follows:
>>
>> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
>> SRC_URI += "file://defconfig"
>>
>> Again, my defconfig is not applied to the build.
>
> It already has file://defconfig in SRC_URI, that's how it works and gets the
> fragments assembled.
>
> What's your platform? Are you sure one of the existing defconfigs are not
> used instead?

I'm building for a BeagleBoneBlack so I expect it's using the
defconfig for that platform.

>
>> I even tried patching kernel-source/ti_config_fragments and placing a
>> eem.cfg in that directory hoping the configuration generation script
>> (defconfig_builder.sh) might apply this fragment.
>>
>> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
>> SRC_URI += "file://0001-eem-config.patch"
>>
>> Where the patch contains:
>>
>> Index: kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
>> ===================================================================
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
>> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
>> +CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
>> +CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
>> +CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
>> +
>>
>> Unfortunately this did not work either.
>
> You also need to update the "map" file, which basically lists all the
> fragments it needs to assemble for a platform. And platform's defconfig only
> points to one of the entries in the map file.
>

Sorry if I'm a bit dense, but could you elaborate on this "map" file.
Where do I find it? What do I need to change? Do I need modify this
file in addition to modifying the KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS as you
mentioned above?

Thanks for your patience (and help),

Glenn

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:14:01PM -0400, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:44:16AM -0400, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> >> I am having trouble modifying the kernel configuration for the
> >> following TI kernel recipe using the Yocto Morty environment:
> >>
> >> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bb
> >>
> >> I have created my own layer and with a *.bbappend file for this recipe, e.g.
> >>
> >> linux-ti-staging-rt_4.9.bbappend
> >>
> >> It appears the TI kernel recipes are not (yet) proper "Yocto" kernel
> >> recipes in that they are not "fragment" aware.
> >
> > TI kernel recipe is not "Yocto" kernel (which is really to say WindRiver
> > format), but the fragment support got upstreamed to the mainline kernel and
> > kernel itself now supports config fragments! That is what TI kernel uses and
> > meta-ti kernel recipe supports.
> 
> Thanks for that clarification. I wasn't aware of the two "flavors" of
> fragment support. It certainly would be nice if a consistent approach
> (between Yocto and the Kernel) could be adopted. I suspect this will
> be sorted out in time.

Well, not that there are 2 flavors. It's just historically many BSPs pushed 
back on adopting linux-yocto/kernel-yocto.bbclass, as it was developed by an 
OSV and, besides config fragments, was also doing few other things that would 
not work for pure kernel developers. But everyone liked the config fragments 
support, so said OSV ended up upstreaming that portion to the kernel itself:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/scripts/kconfig/merge_config.sh


> >> It appears I cannot do
> >> the following inside of my *.bbappend recipe:
> >>
> >> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> >> SRC_URI += "file://eem.cfg"
> >
> > You can add any additional fragments you want to be applied by the recipe to
> > KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS variable.
> 
> This what I ultimately did . . . appended a fully qualified path to my
> fragment to the KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS variable. As a suggestion,
> this might be something useful to include in the README for the
> meta-ti layer. I suspect others might have a similar need to modify
> the kernel configuration and once described, it (now) seems
> straightforward.

I'll look into adding some basic documentation for it...


> >> Inside of "eem.cfg" I want to set the following kernel options:
> >>
> >> CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
> >> CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
> >> CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
> >>
> >> This has no affect. I tried creating my own defconfig based on the
> >> '.config' generated from the original recipe. I modified my *.bbappend
> >> file as follows:
> >>
> >> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> >> SRC_URI += "file://defconfig"
> >>
> >> Again, my defconfig is not applied to the build.
> >
> > It already has file://defconfig in SRC_URI, that's how it works and gets the
> > fragments assembled.
> >
> > What's your platform? Are you sure one of the existing defconfigs are not
> > used instead?
> 
> I'm building for a BeagleBoneBlack so I expect it's using the
> defconfig for that platform.

So, beaglebone.conf sets up SOC_FAMILY to use "ti33x" override, hence it uses 
defconfig in the corresponding ti33x directory. And that defconfig is just a 
redirect to "ti_sdk_am3x_release" entry in the map file I explain below.

That said, since you prepend to FILESEXTRAPATHS and provide your own full 
defconfig, I expect it to take precedence and overwrite everything our recipe 
does - so not sure what didn't work here in your case...


> >> I even tried patching kernel-source/ti_config_fragments and placing a
> >> eem.cfg in that directory hoping the configuration generation script
> >> (defconfig_builder.sh) might apply this fragment.
> >>
> >> FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> >> SRC_URI += "file://0001-eem-config.patch"
> >>
> >> Where the patch contains:
> >>
> >> Index: kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
> >> ===================================================================
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ kernel-source/ti_config_fragments/eem.cfg
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
> >> +CONFIG_USB_NET_CDC_EEM=m
> >> +CONFIG_USB_F_EEM=m
> >> +CONFIG_USB_ETH_EEM=y
> >> +
> >>
> >> Unfortunately this did not work either.
> >
> > You also need to update the "map" file, which basically lists all the
> > fragments it needs to assemble for a platform. And platform's defconfig only
> > points to one of the entries in the map file.
> 
> Sorry if I'm a bit dense, but could you elaborate on this "map" file.
> Where do I find it? What do I need to change? Do I need modify this
> file in addition to modifying the KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS as you
> mentioned above?

Since our kernel developers don't do "yocto" builds directly, when working on 
the kernel, they needed a standalone way to assemble the defconfig from 
fragments. That's why we have this defconfig_builder.sh script and all the 
fragments inside ti_config_fragments directory. And there's defconfig_map.txt 
file along with them to define what and in which order has to be merged:
http://git.ti.com/gitweb/?p=ti-linux-kernel/ti-linux-kernel.git;a=blob;f=ti_config_fragments/defconfig_map.txt;h=1e3dbf436f3242b1239154dad734e87a08431d13;hb=refs/heads/ti-lsk-linux-4.9.y

If you use KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS variable in the recipe to list additional 
config fragments, you don't need to do anything else - that list will be 
applied on top of what defconfig_map.txt defines and what defconfig_builder.sh 
merges.


> Thanks for your patience (and help),

No problem. Let me know if you have more questions.

-- 
Denys

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Glenn Schmottlach]

> So, beaglebone.conf sets up SOC_FAMILY to use "ti33x" override, hence it uses
> defconfig in the corresponding ti33x directory. And that defconfig is just a
> redirect to "ti_sdk_am3x_release" entry in the map file I explain below.
>
> That said, since you prepend to FILESEXTRAPATHS and provide your own full
> defconfig, I expect it to take precedence and overwrite everything our recipe
> does - so not sure what didn't work here in your case...
>

I had hoped just adding a full defconfig to the SRC_URI in my
*.bbappend file would've overwritten the one generated by the TI
kernel recipe but unfortunately (at least in my situation) my custom
defconfig got clobbered by the default one for the BBB. I dumped the
SRC_URI (bitbake -e linux-ti-staging-rt | grep SRC_URI=) and it
contained two defconfig's so it was not entirely clear which one was
being applied last. The KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS trick gets my by my
initial issue but I hope I won't get to the point of needing my own
custom defconfig. Wish I understood why mine didn't take . . . sort of
bothers me given that you said it should have overwritten the default.

Thanks again,

Glenn

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 04:59:30PM -0400, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> > So, beaglebone.conf sets up SOC_FAMILY to use "ti33x" override, hence it uses
> > defconfig in the corresponding ti33x directory. And that defconfig is just a
> > redirect to "ti_sdk_am3x_release" entry in the map file I explain below.
> >
> > That said, since you prepend to FILESEXTRAPATHS and provide your own full
> > defconfig, I expect it to take precedence and overwrite everything our recipe
> > does - so not sure what didn't work here in your case...
> >
> 
> I had hoped just adding a full defconfig to the SRC_URI in my
> *.bbappend file would've overwritten the one generated by the TI
> kernel recipe but unfortunately (at least in my situation) my custom
> defconfig got clobbered by the default one for the BBB. I dumped the
> SRC_URI (bitbake -e linux-ti-staging-rt | grep SRC_URI=) and it
> contained two defconfig's so it was not entirely clear which one was
> being applied last. The KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS trick gets my by my
> initial issue but I hope I won't get to the point of needing my own
> custom defconfig. Wish I understood why mine didn't take . . . sort of
> bothers me given that you said it should have overwritten the default.

Yeah, SRC_URI already contains "defconfig" entry, thus no need to add it the 
second time in your bbappend. Just doing the standard FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend 
trick in your bbappend should be enough to get it loaded in place of standard 
meta-ti config stuff.

What is your layer's BBFILE_PRIORITY? And where exactly do you add it to 
BBLAYERS list in your conf/bblayers.conf file?

-- 
Denys

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Glenn Schmottlach]

>> I had hoped just adding a full defconfig to the SRC_URI in my
>> *.bbappend file would've overwritten the one generated by the TI
>> kernel recipe but unfortunately (at least in my situation) my custom
>> defconfig got clobbered by the default one for the BBB. I dumped the
>> SRC_URI (bitbake -e linux-ti-staging-rt | grep SRC_URI=) and it
>> contained two defconfig's so it was not entirely clear which one was
>> being applied last. The KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS trick gets my by my
>> initial issue but I hope I won't get to the point of needing my own
>> custom defconfig. Wish I understood why mine didn't take . . . sort of
>> bothers me given that you said it should have overwritten the default.
>
> Yeah, SRC_URI already contains "defconfig" entry, thus no need to add it the
> second time in your bbappend. Just doing the standard FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend
> trick in your bbappend should be enough to get it loaded in place of standard
> meta-ti config stuff.
>
> What is your layer's BBFILE_PRIORITY? And where exactly do you add it to
> BBLAYERS list in your conf/bblayers.conf file?
>

I set my BBFILE_PRIORITY to "8" which is higher than meta-ti ("6") so
I would've thought it takes precedence over meta-ti recipes. My layer
is referenced in bblayers.conf and the layer's "conf/layer.conf" looks
like this:

=====================================================

# We have a conf and classes directory, append to BBPATH
BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"

# We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES
BBFILES += "${LAYERDIR}/recipes*/*/*.bb
${LAYERDIR}/recipes*/*/*.bbappend ${LAYERDIR}/images/*.bb"

BBFILE_COLLECTIONS += "meta-acme"
BBFILE_PATTERN_meta-acme := "^${LAYERDIR}/"
BBFILE_PRIORITY_meta-acme = "8"

=======================================================

Pretty standard stuff. It's definitely finding my recipes so I don't
think that's an issue. What do you suspect might be going on?

Thanks,

Glenn

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 07:52:41AM -0400, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> >> I had hoped just adding a full defconfig to the SRC_URI in my
> >> *.bbappend file would've overwritten the one generated by the TI
> >> kernel recipe but unfortunately (at least in my situation) my custom
> >> defconfig got clobbered by the default one for the BBB. I dumped the
> >> SRC_URI (bitbake -e linux-ti-staging-rt | grep SRC_URI=) and it
> >> contained two defconfig's so it was not entirely clear which one was
> >> being applied last. The KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS trick gets my by my
> >> initial issue but I hope I won't get to the point of needing my own
> >> custom defconfig. Wish I understood why mine didn't take . . . sort of
> >> bothers me given that you said it should have overwritten the default.
> >
> > Yeah, SRC_URI already contains "defconfig" entry, thus no need to add it the
> > second time in your bbappend. Just doing the standard FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend
> > trick in your bbappend should be enough to get it loaded in place of standard
> > meta-ti config stuff.
> >
> > What is your layer's BBFILE_PRIORITY? And where exactly do you add it to
> > BBLAYERS list in your conf/bblayers.conf file?
> >
> 
> I set my BBFILE_PRIORITY to "8" which is higher than meta-ti ("6") so
> I would've thought it takes precedence over meta-ti recipes. My layer
> is referenced in bblayers.conf and the layer's "conf/layer.conf" looks
> like this:
> 
> =====================================================
> 
> # We have a conf and classes directory, append to BBPATH
> BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
> 
> # We have a recipes directory, add to BBFILES
> BBFILES += "${LAYERDIR}/recipes*/*/*.bb
> ${LAYERDIR}/recipes*/*/*.bbappend ${LAYERDIR}/images/*.bb"
> 
> BBFILE_COLLECTIONS += "meta-acme"
> BBFILE_PATTERN_meta-acme := "^${LAYERDIR}/"
> BBFILE_PRIORITY_meta-acme = "8"
> 
> =======================================================
> 
> Pretty standard stuff. It's definitely finding my recipes so I don't
> think that's an issue. What do you suspect might be going on?

Looks good... Can you try moving your defconfig into "ti33x" folder?

recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-staging-rt_%.bbappend
recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-staging-rt/ti33x/defconfig

-- 
Denys

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Glenn Schmottlach]

>
> Looks good... Can you try moving your defconfig into "ti33x" folder?
>
> recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-staging-rt_%.bbappend
> recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-staging-rt/ti33x/defconfig
>

You're a genius! ;-)

I moved the defconfig into a ti33x sub-directory and it appears
bitbake now uses my defconfig instead of the (default) one. So at
least now I have two approaches for configuring different kernel
options: replace the defconfig with my own or use fragments for
surgical strikes.

Thanks so much for your help . . .

Glenn

Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:41:22PM -0400, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> >
> > Looks good... Can you try moving your defconfig into "ti33x" folder?
> >
> > recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-staging-rt_%.bbappend
> > recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-staging-rt/ti33x/defconfig
> >
> 
> You're a genius! ;-)
> 
> I moved the defconfig into a ti33x sub-directory and it appears
> bitbake now uses my defconfig instead of the (default) one. So at
> least now I have two approaches for configuring different kernel
> options: replace the defconfig with my own or use fragments for
> surgical strikes.
> 
> Thanks so much for your help . . .

You are welcome. It's interesting that file overrides are still in play and 
take precedence with bbappends... Need to keep that in mind.

-- 
Denys