From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 29211E00524; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:45:54 -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=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from fllnx209.ext.ti.com (fllnx209.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.16]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E64D0E0030B for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:45:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dlelxv90.itg.ti.com ([172.17.2.17]) by fllnx209.ext.ti.com (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTP id v2LHjTeY005282; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 12:45:29 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1490118329; bh=UgyxBFhEfZ5zHNiyGSySTpq0daCpv59TdPXSXdqNhps=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=WsZDeHn3GD6ZP5I3x9lzSpwL5ZVqLN9miiPPta7HxyoQUh4vO1bwwCDUKBxKhgbyc F6i3AEd7jNtzTBzk7P9jyTQDRDXRaemyY26hhcUoiu/2MxTE70b/2rAUa/KPFQvH4t 7ckpO03tFeVDVjK02VLcPwto6JpxP3upLxRh6N6s= Received: from DFLE72.ent.ti.com (dfle72.ent.ti.com [128.247.5.109]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v2LHjO6F009245; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 12:45:24 -0500 Received: from dflp32.itg.ti.com (10.64.6.15) by DFLE72.ent.ti.com (128.247.5.109) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.294.0; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 12:45:23 -0500 Received: from localhost (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dflp32.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v2LHjNg4031293; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 12:45:23 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:45:23 -0400 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: Glenn Schmottlach Message-ID: <20170321174523.GA25961@edge> References: <20170320155459.GP14484@edge> <20170320201516.GD23524@edge> <20170320210801.GB24585@edge> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: meta-ti@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: Trouble modifying defconfig for linux-ti-staging_rt recipe X-BeenThere: meta-ti@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-ti layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:45:54 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline 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