Re: [meta-ti] [master/kirkstone][PATCH 2/2] ti-sgx-ddk-um: use udev for userspace initialization

[Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>]

On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 10:20:12AM +0100, Matthias Schiffer wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-02-22 at 20:38 -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > So, testing the latest patch series, I started getting breakage on all SGX 
> > platforms:
> > 
> > WARNING: tisdk-default-image-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: ti-sgx-ddk-um.postinst returned 1, marking as unpacked only, configuration required on target.
> > ERROR: tisdk-default-image-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: Postinstall scriptlets of ['ti-sgx-ddk-um'] have failed. If the intention is to defer them to first boot,
> > then please place them into pkg_postinst_ontarget:${PN} ().
> > Deferring to first boot via 'exit 1' is no longer supported.
> > Details of the failure are in /OE/arago-kirkstone/build/arago-tmp-default-glibc/work/am335x_evm-oe-linux-gnueabi/tisdk-default-image/1.0-r0/temp/log.do_rootfs.
> > ERROR: Logfile of failure stored in: /OE/arago-kirkstone/build/arago-tmp-default-glibc/work/am335x_evm-oe-linux-gnueabi/tisdk-default-image/1.0-r0/temp/log.do_rootfs.156835
> > ERROR: Task (/OE/arago-kirkstone/sources/meta-arago/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-default-image.bb:do_rootfs) failed with exit code '1'
> > 
> > 
> > WARNING: tisdk-default-image-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: ti-sgx-ddk-um.postinst returned 1, marking as unpacked only, configuration required on target.
> > ERROR: tisdk-default-image-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: Postinstall scriptlets of ['ti-sgx-ddk-um'] have failed. If the intention is to defer them to first boot,
> > then please place them into pkg_postinst_ontarget:${PN} ().
> > Deferring to first boot via 'exit 1' is no longer supported.
> > Details of the failure are in /OE/arago-kirkstone/build/arago-tmp-default-glibc/work/am57xx_evm-oe-linux-gnueabi/tisdk-default-image/1.0-r0/temp/log.do_rootfs.
> > ERROR: Logfile of failure stored in: /OE/arago-kirkstone/build/arago-tmp-default-glibc/work/am57xx_evm-oe-linux-gnueabi/tisdk-default-image/1.0-r0/temp/log.do_rootfs.164346
> > ERROR: Task (/OE/arago-kirkstone/sources/meta-arago/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-default-image.bb:do_rootfs) failed with exit code '1'
> > 
> > 
> > WARNING: tisdk-default-image-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: ti-sgx-ddk-um.postinst returned 1, marking as unpacked only, configuration required on target.
> > ERROR: tisdk-default-image-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: Postinstall scriptlets of ['ti-sgx-ddk-um'] have failed. If the intention is to defer them to first boot,
> > then please place them into pkg_postinst_ontarget:${PN} ().
> > Deferring to first boot via 'exit 1' is no longer supported.
> > Details of the failure are in /OE/arago-kirkstone/build/arago-tmp-default-glibc/work/am65xx_evm-oe-linux/tisdk-default-image/1.0-r0/temp/log.do_rootfs.
> > ERROR: Logfile of failure stored in: /OE/arago-kirkstone/build/arago-tmp-default-glibc/work/am65xx_evm-oe-linux/tisdk-default-image/1.0-r0/temp/log.do_rootfs.159785
> > ERROR: Task (/OE/arago-kirkstone/sources/meta-arago/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-default-image.bb:do_rootfs) failed with exit code '1'
> > 
> > 
> > Reverting this commit helps with the build:
> > https://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-ti/commit/?h=kirkstone&id=f50f55102f926ba58ea22339a98e4239370af6c6
> > 
> > 
> > So far I didn't have time to dig deeper, though it's not obvious right away...
> > 
> 
> Hi Denys,
> 
> I assume that the failing postinst script must come from update-
> rc.d.bbclass, but without knowing what command in the script is failing
> it's difficult to say anything for certain. Would it be possible for
> you to make a ti-sgx-ddk-um RPM or similar from the failing build
> available for us to have a look at?
> 
> What DISTRO_FEATURES is your build using? sysvinit, no systemd?

Matthias,

This is default Arago distro with both systemd and sysvinit in the 
DISTRO_FEATURES, and it generates IPKs. I looked at the corresponding 
postinst scripts and didn't see anything obvious.

Unfortunately, I didn't have time to debug that further and had to 
switch to graphics updates. Part of it was updating SGX UM recipe 
and forcing rebuild, so I haven't seen any breakage since then.

I might try reshuffling my patch queue in order to reproduce it, if I 
have time, to see if it was due to stale sstate or something similar.

-- 
Denys