From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fllv0016.ext.ti.com (fllv0016.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.142]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web08.4568.1604008589857034902 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:56:30 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17q1 header.b=PGmmWk5k; spf=pass (domain: ti.com, ip: 198.47.19.142, mailfrom: denys@ti.com) Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by fllv0016.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 09TLuSj6010918; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 16:56:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1604008589; bh=bGdL+A5nslHuEgg8atgyoAVlsc0ZiQ4qCOSL3HxKHi8=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=PGmmWk5kMjnLXkcoEVM2cWIttl+ZGta3Vrt21utJChtmijmKwIDJFT778lvZisxLN 4FUv3XVLrCtywnwse/EDa/HolMTq4XPGh/xMeFquJEw/B05bF83xQvkaIW9R4vb60/ YbuGPjSkrIFOO3OeTEi2XDBgaA4M/2ypk5I+d9Ko= Received: from DFLE113.ent.ti.com (dfle113.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.34]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 09TLuS1T098911 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 29 Oct 2020 16:56:28 -0500 Received: from DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) by DFLE113.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 16:56:28 -0500 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 16:56:28 -0500 Received: from localhost (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 09TLuSqL004979; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 16:56:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 17:56:28 -0400 From: "Denys Dmytriyenko" To: Suman Anna CC: Khem Raj , Subject: Re: [meta-ti] [PATCH 1/2] ti-rpmsg-char-examples: Fix cross compile Message-ID: <20201029215628.GP15849@beryl> References: <20201025065934.3308920-1-raj.khem@gmail.com> <20201026212000.GO19741@beryl> <1641B93D38E82508.16876@lists.yoctoproject.org> <20201029180925.GI15849@beryl> <9a91ee70-70f0-e350-f81e-94ea7927e302@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9a91ee70-70f0-e350-f81e-94ea7927e302@ti.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 04:50:24PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote: > Hi Denys, > > On 10/29/20 3:09 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:09 AM Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 10:43:32PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > >>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 04:24:11PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >>>> I think it should be applied but then I don't know how else this > >>>> component is used. maybe there are some toolchains which don't have > >>>> sysrooots used to compile this > >>> > >>> This is meant to be cross-compiled for the target, in which case accessing > >>> host headers or libraries is a bad idea regardless of the toolchain... > >> > >> Khem, Suman, > >> > >> Any conclusion here? Should this change be taken upstream by Suman? Or should > >> this reside here as a patch with "Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [OE-specific]"? > >> > > > > its needed in OE for sure. Other places I don't know so literally your call. > > If it is needed by OE, I am ok with this going in for now. I will leave it to > your expertise for the ack for this patch. > > I need to look into this a bit more to see if I need to revise the build stuff > in the actual source repo, or I need to tweak the OE recipe to keep both happy. > I also cross-compile on my host machine when directly using automake, and as > such I don't use --prefix as /usr. > > I need to have a successful OE environment for me to evaluate a proper fix, but > I am currently running into various issues when building tisdk-default-image > (tisdk-tiny-image and tisdk-base-image were ok). Thanks, Suman. So I guess we can carry this patch in meta-ti for now, until you get a chance to look into it a bit closer. Khem, Do you want to send v2 with Upstream-Statu: either Pending or Inappropriate? Denys > regards > Suman > > > > >> Denys > >> > >> > >>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 2:20 PM Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 11:59:33PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >>>>>> This fixes problems during cross compile where it starts to peek into > >>>>>> build host's include and library paths and causes errors with clang and > >>>>>> QA warnings with gcc > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> ...-Remove-use-of-includedir-and-libdir.patch | 37 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>>> recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples_git.bb | 2 + > >>>>>> 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+) > >>>>>> create mode 100644 recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples/0001-examples-Remove-use-of-includedir-and-libdir.patch > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples/0001-examples-Remove-use-of-includedir-and-libdir.patch b/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples/0001-examples-Remove-use-of-includedir-and-libdir.patch > >>>>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>>>> index 00000000..34807152 > >>>>>> --- /dev/null > >>>>>> +++ b/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples/0001-examples-Remove-use-of-includedir-and-libdir.patch > >>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ > >>>>>> +From 1a26cb577ba54dd9214eeb94fed0ce3a0f4603b6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >>>>>> +From: Khem Raj > >>>>>> +Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 23:46:39 -0700 > >>>>>> +Subject: [PATCH] examples: Remove use of includedir and libdir > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> +These point to standard include and library paths which already are used > >>>>>> +from sysroot relative paths secondly, they use absolute paths which > >>>>>> +means we are asking to add -I/usr/include which might be ok in a native > >>>>>> +build but not in cross build. This helps mitigate QA errors found with > >>>>>> +OE build system since it finds it adding host include and library search > >>>>>> +paths to linker/compiler commandline > >>>>> > >>>>> What's the Upstream-Status on this? Should it be "Inappropriate [OE-specific]"? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> +Signed-off-by: Khem Raj > >>>>>> +--- > >>>>>> + examples/Makefile.am | 5 +---- > >>>>>> + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> +diff --git a/examples/Makefile.am b/examples/Makefile.am > >>>>>> +index 5a9bedb..d547e41 100644 > >>>>>> +--- a/examples/Makefile.am > >>>>>> ++++ b/examples/Makefile.am > >>>>>> +@@ -1,6 +1,4 @@ > >>>>>> +-INCLUDE = -I${includedir} > >>>>>> +- > >>>>>> +-AM_CFLAGS = -Wall -g -O2 $(INCLUDE) > >>>>>> ++AM_CFLAGS = -Wall -g -O2 > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> + bin_PROGRAMS = rpmsg_char_simple > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> +@@ -8,4 +6,3 @@ bin_PROGRAMS = rpmsg_char_simple > >>>>>> + rpmsg_char_simple_SOURCES = rpmsg_char_simple.c > >>>>>> + rpmsg_char_simple_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS) > >>>>>> + rpmsg_char_simple_LDADD = -lpthread -lti_rpmsg_char > >>>>>> +-rpmsg_char_simple_LDFLAGS = -L${libdir} > >>>>>> +-- > >>>>>> +2.29.1 > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> diff --git a/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples_git.bb b/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples_git.bb > >>>>>> index 142e5bf0..cbe4d7fd 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples_git.bb > >>>>>> +++ b/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-rpmsg-char-examples_git.bb > >>>>>> @@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ SUMMARY = "TI RPMsg Char Sample Applications and Tests" > >>>>>> > >>>>>> require ti-rpmsg-char.inc > >>>>>> > >>>>>> +SRC_URI += "file://0001-examples-Remove-use-of-includedir-and-libdir.patch" > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> DEPENDS = "ti-rpmsg-char" > >>>>>> > >>>>>> inherit autotools pkgconfig > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> 2.29.1 > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >