[meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Zhenhua Luo]

From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>

This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD or FreeBSD.
The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from userspace,
thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a cipher.

Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
---
 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb          |   17 +++++++++++++
 .../cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch           |   26 ++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
 create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch

diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0696e2a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+SECTION = "devel"
+SUMMARY = "Linux Cryptodev KERNEL MODULE"
+DESCRIPTION = "The Cryptodev package contains the kernel /dev/crypto module"
+LICENSE = "GPLv2"
+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=b234ee4d69f5fce4486a80fdaf4a4263"
+RCONFLICTS_${PN} = "ocf-linux"
+
+inherit module
+
+SRCREV = "1c24a0aa996630518d47826a2e3fea129ea094c7"
+
+SRC_URI = "git://repo.or.cz/cryptodev-linux.git;protocol=git \
+           file://makefile_fixup.patch"
+
+EXTRA_OEMAKE='KERNEL_DIR="${STAGING_KERNEL_DIR}" PREFIX="${D}"'
+
+S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..323aacd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
+index 2be8825..b36d68c 100644
+--- a/Makefile
++++ b/Makefile
+@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
+ KBUILD_CFLAGS += -I$(src)
+ KERNEL_DIR = /lib/modules/$(shell uname -r)/build
+ VERSION = 1.5
++PREFIX =
+ 
+ cryptodev-objs = ioctl.o main.o cryptlib.o authenc.o zc.o util.o
+ 
+@@ -12,10 +13,10 @@ build: version.h
+ version.h: Makefile
+ 	@echo "#define VERSION \"$(VERSION)\"" > version.h
+ 
+-install:
++modules_install:
+ 	make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules_install
+-	@echo "Installing cryptodev.h in /usr/include/crypto ..."
+-	@install -D crypto/cryptodev.h /usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
++	@echo "Installing cryptodev.h in $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto ..."
++	@install -D crypto/cryptodev.h $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
+ 
+ clean:
+ 	make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` clean
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com> wrote:
> From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>
> This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD or FreeBSD.
> The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from userspace,
> thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a cipher.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>

Should this work on master and danny as well?

-M

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Luo Zhenhua-B19537]

I don't think it is urgent to apply it in danny and master now. 

I'd like to see what will happen on acceptance of this patch by upstream oe-core/meta-oe. 


Best Regards,

Zhenhua

> -----Original Message-----
> From: McClintock Matthew-B29882
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:54 PM
> To: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
> Cc: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org; McClintock Matthew-B29882; Dutta
> Yashpal-B05456
> Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel
> module recipe
> 
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
> wrote:
> > From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> >
> > This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD or
> FreeBSD.
> > The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from
> > userspace, thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a
> cipher.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
> 
> Should this work on master and danny as well?
> 
> -M

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Dutta Yashpal-B05456]

Hi Zhenhua,

I don't understand your statement on urgency. Cryptodev must be part of SDK-1.3.1 release. So,
Keeping it in meta-fsl-ppc is required till upstream completes.

Regards
Yashpal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:30 AM
> To: McClintock Matthew-B29882
> Cc: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org; Dutta Yashpal-B05456
> Subject: RE: [meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel
> module recipe
> 
> I don't think it is urgent to apply it in danny and master now.
> 
> I'd like to see what will happen on acceptance of this patch by upstream
> oe-core/meta-oe.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Zhenhua
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: McClintock Matthew-B29882
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:54 PM
> > To: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
> > Cc: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org; McClintock Matthew-B29882; Dutta
> > Yashpal-B05456
> > Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel
> > module recipe
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
> > wrote:
> > > From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> > >
> > > This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD
> > > or
> > FreeBSD.
> > > The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from
> > > userspace, thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a
> > cipher.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
> >
> > Should this work on master and danny as well?
> >
> > -M

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Dutta Yashpal-B05456
<B05456@freescale.com> wrote:
> Hi Zhenhua,
>
> I don't understand your statement on urgency. Cryptodev must be part of SDK-1.3.1 release. So,
> Keeping it in meta-fsl-ppc is required till upstream completes.

Yashpal,

You are posting to an upstream list. This patch is already in the SDK.

-M

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Luo Zhenhua-B19537]

I mean we need to put this package into upstream oe-core or meta-oe, this shouldn't be FSL PPC specific package. 


Best Regards,

Zhenhua


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dutta Yashpal-B05456
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:03 PM
> To: Luo Zhenhua-B19537; McClintock Matthew-B29882
> Cc: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org
> Subject: RE: [meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel
> module recipe
> 
> Hi Zhenhua,
> 
> I don't understand your statement on urgency. Cryptodev must be part of
> SDK-1.3.1 release. So, Keeping it in meta-fsl-ppc is required till
> upstream completes.
> 
> Regards
> Yashpal
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:30 AM
> > To: McClintock Matthew-B29882
> > Cc: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org; Dutta Yashpal-B05456
> > Subject: RE: [meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel
> > module recipe
> >
> > I don't think it is urgent to apply it in danny and master now.
> >
> > I'd like to see what will happen on acceptance of this patch by
> > upstream oe-core/meta-oe.
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Zhenhua
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: McClintock Matthew-B29882
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:54 PM
> > > To: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
> > > Cc: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org; McClintock Matthew-B29882;
> > > Dutta
> > > Yashpal-B05456
> > > Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel
> > > module recipe
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> > > >
> > > > This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in
> > > > OpenBSD or
> > > FreeBSD.
> > > > The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space
> > > > from userspace, thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation
> > > > of a
> > > cipher.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
> > >
> > > Should this work on master and danny as well?
> > >
> > > -M

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Bob Cochran]

On 11/28/2012 12:00 AM, Luo Zhenhua-B19537 wrote:
> I don't think it is urgent to apply it in danny and master now.

If it does go into meta-fsl-ppc, I hope you'll also include it in the 
master branch.  This way, people working with master can test it.

Thanks

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Otavio Salvador]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com> wrote:
> From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>
> This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD or FreeBSD.
> The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from userspace,
> thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a cipher.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>

I think this should be send to meta-oe as it is not SoC specific,
however I have some comments in the recipe so you can fix them before
it...

> ---
>  recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb          |   17 +++++++++++++
>  .../cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch           |   26 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>
> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..0696e2a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
> +SECTION = "devel"
> +SUMMARY = "Linux Cryptodev KERNEL MODULE"
> +DESCRIPTION = "The Cryptodev package contains the kernel /dev/crypto module"
> +LICENSE = "GPLv2"
> +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=b234ee4d69f5fce4486a80fdaf4a4263"
> +RCONFLICTS_${PN} = "ocf-linux"
> +
> +inherit module
> +
> +SRCREV = "1c24a0aa996630518d47826a2e3fea129ea094c7"
> +
> +SRC_URI = "git://repo.or.cz/cryptodev-linux.git;protocol=git \
> +           file://makefile_fixup.patch"
> +
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE='KERNEL_DIR="${STAGING_KERNEL_DIR}" PREFIX="${D}"'
>
> +S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..323aacd
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> +diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> +index 2be8825..b36d68c 100644
> +--- a/Makefile
> ++++ b/Makefile
> +@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> + KBUILD_CFLAGS += -I$(src)
> + KERNEL_DIR = /lib/modules/$(shell uname -r)/build

Please rename the KERNEL_DIR variable to KERNEL_SRC so it follow the
standard variables used by modules in general and you can avoid
setting it in the bb file.

> + VERSION = 1.5
> ++PREFIX =

The expected variable is DESTDIR. In fact you should have both, read bellow...

> + cryptodev-objs = ioctl.o main.o cryptlib.o authenc.o zc.o util.o
> +
> +@@ -12,10 +13,10 @@ build: version.h
> + version.h: Makefile
> +       @echo "#define VERSION \"$(VERSION)\"" > version.h
> +
> +-install:
> ++modules_install:
> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules_install
> +-      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in /usr/include/crypto ..."
> +-      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h /usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
> ++      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto ..."
> ++      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h

Use $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/include/...

> + clean:
> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` clean



-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Otavio Salvador
<otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com> wrote:
>> From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>>
>> This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD or FreeBSD.
>> The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from userspace,
>> thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a cipher.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
>
> I think this should be send to meta-oe as it is not SoC specific,
> however I have some comments in the recipe so you can fix them before
> it...
>
>> ---
>>  recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb          |   17 +++++++++++++
>>  .../cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch           |   26 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>  2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>>
>> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..0696e2a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
>> +SECTION = "devel"
>> +SUMMARY = "Linux Cryptodev KERNEL MODULE"
>> +DESCRIPTION = "The Cryptodev package contains the kernel /dev/crypto module"
>> +LICENSE = "GPLv2"
>> +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=b234ee4d69f5fce4486a80fdaf4a4263"
>> +RCONFLICTS_${PN} = "ocf-linux"
>> +
>> +inherit module
>> +
>> +SRCREV = "1c24a0aa996630518d47826a2e3fea129ea094c7"
>> +
>> +SRC_URI = "git://repo.or.cz/cryptodev-linux.git;protocol=git \
>> +           file://makefile_fixup.patch"
>> +
>> +EXTRA_OEMAKE='KERNEL_DIR="${STAGING_KERNEL_DIR}" PREFIX="${D}"'
>>
>> +S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
>> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..323aacd
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
>> +diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>> +index 2be8825..b36d68c 100644
>> +--- a/Makefile
>> ++++ b/Makefile
>> +@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>> + KBUILD_CFLAGS += -I$(src)
>> + KERNEL_DIR = /lib/modules/$(shell uname -r)/build
>
> Please rename the KERNEL_DIR variable to KERNEL_SRC so it follow the
> standard variables used by modules in general and you can avoid
> setting it in the bb file.

You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.

OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.

>
>> + VERSION = 1.5
>> ++PREFIX =
>
> The expected variable is DESTDIR. In fact you should have both, read bellow...

You are right here... it should be ${DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)

-M

>
>> + cryptodev-objs = ioctl.o main.o cryptlib.o authenc.o zc.o util.o
>> +
>> +@@ -12,10 +13,10 @@ build: version.h
>> + version.h: Makefile
>> +       @echo "#define VERSION \"$(VERSION)\"" > version.h
>> +
>> +-install:
>> ++modules_install:
>> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules_install
>> +-      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in /usr/include/crypto ..."
>> +-      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h /usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
>> ++      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto ..."
>> ++      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
>
> Use $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/include/...
>
>> + clean:
>> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` clean
>
>
>
> --
> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
> E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
> Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
> _______________________________________________
> meta-freescale mailing list
> meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Otavio Salvador]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
<B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com> wrote:
>>> From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>>>
>>> This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD or FreeBSD.
>>> The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from userspace,
>>> thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a cipher.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
>>
>> I think this should be send to meta-oe as it is not SoC specific,
>> however I have some comments in the recipe so you can fix them before
>> it...
>>
>>> ---
>>>  recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb          |   17 +++++++++++++
>>>  .../cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch           |   26 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>>>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>>>
>>> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..0696e2a
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
>>> +SECTION = "devel"
>>> +SUMMARY = "Linux Cryptodev KERNEL MODULE"
>>> +DESCRIPTION = "The Cryptodev package contains the kernel /dev/crypto module"
>>> +LICENSE = "GPLv2"
>>> +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=b234ee4d69f5fce4486a80fdaf4a4263"
>>> +RCONFLICTS_${PN} = "ocf-linux"
>>> +
>>> +inherit module
>>> +
>>> +SRCREV = "1c24a0aa996630518d47826a2e3fea129ea094c7"
>>> +
>>> +SRC_URI = "git://repo.or.cz/cryptodev-linux.git;protocol=git \
>>> +           file://makefile_fixup.patch"
>>> +
>>> +EXTRA_OEMAKE='KERNEL_DIR="${STAGING_KERNEL_DIR}" PREFIX="${D}"'
>>>
>>> +S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
>>> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..323aacd
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
>>> +diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>>> +index 2be8825..b36d68c 100644
>>> +--- a/Makefile
>>> ++++ b/Makefile
>>> +@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>>> + KBUILD_CFLAGS += -I$(src)
>>> + KERNEL_DIR = /lib/modules/$(shell uname -r)/build
>>
>> Please rename the KERNEL_DIR variable to KERNEL_SRC so it follow the
>> standard variables used by modules in general and you can avoid
>> setting it in the bb file.
>
> You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
> in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
> We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
> don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.
>
> OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.

Yes I know it is inside of the project Makefile however you're
patching it anyway so better to make it us the standards and send
upstream.

>>> + VERSION = 1.5
>>> ++PREFIX =
>>
>> The expected variable is DESTDIR. In fact you should have both, read bellow...
>
> You are right here... it should be ${DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)
>
> -M
>
>>
>>> + cryptodev-objs = ioctl.o main.o cryptlib.o authenc.o zc.o util.o
>>> +
>>> +@@ -12,10 +13,10 @@ build: version.h
>>> + version.h: Makefile
>>> +       @echo "#define VERSION \"$(VERSION)\"" > version.h
>>> +
>>> +-install:
>>> ++modules_install:
>>> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules_install
>>> +-      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in /usr/include/crypto ..."
>>> +-      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h /usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
>>> ++      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto ..."
>>> ++      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
>>
>> Use $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/include/...
>>
>>> + clean:
>>> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` clean
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
>> E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
>> Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
>> _______________________________________________
>> meta-freescale mailing list
>> meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale



-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Otavio Salvador
<otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
> <B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Otavio Salvador
>> <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>>>>
>>>> This is a /dev/crypto device driver, equivalent to those in OpenBSD or FreeBSD.
>>>> The main idea is to access of existing ciphers in kernel space from userspace,
>>>> thus enabling re-use of a hardware implementation of a cipher.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yashpal Dutta <yashpal.dutta@freescale.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <b19537@freescale.com>
>>>
>>> I think this should be send to meta-oe as it is not SoC specific,
>>> however I have some comments in the recipe so you can fix them before
>>> it...
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>  recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb          |   17 +++++++++++++
>>>>  .../cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch           |   26 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>>>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>>>>  create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..0696e2a
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/cryptodev_1.5.bb
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
>>>> +SECTION = "devel"
>>>> +SUMMARY = "Linux Cryptodev KERNEL MODULE"
>>>> +DESCRIPTION = "The Cryptodev package contains the kernel /dev/crypto module"
>>>> +LICENSE = "GPLv2"
>>>> +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=b234ee4d69f5fce4486a80fdaf4a4263"
>>>> +RCONFLICTS_${PN} = "ocf-linux"
>>>> +
>>>> +inherit module
>>>> +
>>>> +SRCREV = "1c24a0aa996630518d47826a2e3fea129ea094c7"
>>>> +
>>>> +SRC_URI = "git://repo.or.cz/cryptodev-linux.git;protocol=git \
>>>> +           file://makefile_fixup.patch"
>>>> +
>>>> +EXTRA_OEMAKE='KERNEL_DIR="${STAGING_KERNEL_DIR}" PREFIX="${D}"'
>>>>
>>>> +S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
>>>> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..323aacd
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/recipes-kernel/cryptodev/files/makefile_fixup.patch
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
>>>> +diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>>>> +index 2be8825..b36d68c 100644
>>>> +--- a/Makefile
>>>> ++++ b/Makefile
>>>> +@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>>>> + KBUILD_CFLAGS += -I$(src)
>>>> + KERNEL_DIR = /lib/modules/$(shell uname -r)/build
>>>
>>> Please rename the KERNEL_DIR variable to KERNEL_SRC so it follow the
>>> standard variables used by modules in general and you can avoid
>>> setting it in the bb file.
>>
>> You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
>> in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
>> We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
>> don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.
>>
>> OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.
>
> Yes I know it is inside of the project Makefile however you're
> patching it anyway so better to make it us the standards and send
> upstream.

That's fine, but I would not let that hold up this patch if the author
did not want to pursue getting upstream to change such things. ;)

-M


>>>> + VERSION = 1.5
>>>> ++PREFIX =
>>>
>>> The expected variable is DESTDIR. In fact you should have both, read bellow...
>>
>> You are right here... it should be ${DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)
>>
>> -M
>>
>>>
>>>> + cryptodev-objs = ioctl.o main.o cryptlib.o authenc.o zc.o util.o
>>>> +
>>>> +@@ -12,10 +13,10 @@ build: version.h
>>>> + version.h: Makefile
>>>> +       @echo "#define VERSION \"$(VERSION)\"" > version.h
>>>> +
>>>> +-install:
>>>> ++modules_install:
>>>> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` modules_install
>>>> +-      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in /usr/include/crypto ..."
>>>> +-      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h /usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
>>>> ++      @echo "Installing cryptodev.h in $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto ..."
>>>> ++      @install -D crypto/cryptodev.h $(PREFIX)/usr/include/crypto/cryptodev.h
>>>
>>> Use $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/include/...
>>>
>>>> + clean:
>>>> +       make -C $(KERNEL_DIR) SUBDIRS=`pwd` clean
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
>>> E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
>>> Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> meta-freescale mailing list
>>> meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org
>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
>
>
>
> --
> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
> E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
> Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
> _______________________________________________
> meta-freescale mailing list
> meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Otavio Salvador]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
<B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
>>> You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
>>> in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
>>> We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
>>> don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.
>>>
>>> OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.
>>
>> Yes I know it is inside of the project Makefile however you're
>> patching it anyway so better to make it us the standards and send
>> upstream.
>
> That's fine, but I would not let that hold up this patch if the author
> did not want to pursue getting upstream to change such things. ;)

This recipe is not target to meta-fsl-ppc, is it? It seems to fit
meta-openembedded.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Otavio Salvador
<otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
> <B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
>>>> You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
>>>> in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
>>>> We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
>>>> don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.
>>>>
>>>> OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.
>>>
>>> Yes I know it is inside of the project Makefile however you're
>>> patching it anyway so better to make it us the standards and send
>>> upstream.
>>
>> That's fine, but I would not let that hold up this patch if the author
>> did not want to pursue getting upstream to change such things. ;)
>
> This recipe is not target to meta-fsl-ppc, is it? It seems to fit
> meta-openembedded.

Well, the maintainer there would have the final say, but I think
changing an upstream projects stuff should not effect it's acceptance
(into meta-oe or meta-fsl-ppc)

-M

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[Otavio Salvador]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:33 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
<B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
>> <B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
>>>>> You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
>>>>> in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
>>>>> We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
>>>>> don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.
>>>>>
>>>>> OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.
>>>>
>>>> Yes I know it is inside of the project Makefile however you're
>>>> patching it anyway so better to make it us the standards and send
>>>> upstream.
>>>
>>> That's fine, but I would not let that hold up this patch if the author
>>> did not want to pursue getting upstream to change such things. ;)
>>
>> This recipe is not target to meta-fsl-ppc, is it? It seems to fit
>> meta-openembedded.
>
> Well, the maintainer there would have the final say, but I think
> changing an upstream projects stuff should not effect it's acceptance
> (into meta-oe or meta-fsl-ppc)

I am not in position to nack something for meta-fsl-ppc. In meta-oe I
am in some areas but not in crypto packages; however meta-oe
discussion is off-topic here.

My intention to comment on the recipe was to help. I noticed something
that had an alternative solution and seemed easy to improve it as it
was going to add a patch for Makefile so change one or two lines
wouldn't be a big deal ...

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe

[McClintock Matthew-B29882]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Otavio Salvador
<otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:33 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
> <B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Otavio Salvador
>> <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
>>> <B29882@freescale.com> wrote:
>>>>>> You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
>>>>>> in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
>>>>>> We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
>>>>>> don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes I know it is inside of the project Makefile however you're
>>>>> patching it anyway so better to make it us the standards and send
>>>>> upstream.
>>>>
>>>> That's fine, but I would not let that hold up this patch if the author
>>>> did not want to pursue getting upstream to change such things. ;)
>>>
>>> This recipe is not target to meta-fsl-ppc, is it? It seems to fit
>>> meta-openembedded.
>>
>> Well, the maintainer there would have the final say, but I think
>> changing an upstream projects stuff should not effect it's acceptance
>> (into meta-oe or meta-fsl-ppc)
>
> I am not in position to nack something for meta-fsl-ppc. In meta-oe I
> am in some areas but not in crypto packages; however meta-oe
> discussion is off-topic here.
>
> My intention to comment on the recipe was to help. I noticed something
> that had an alternative solution and seemed easy to improve it as it
> was going to add a patch for Makefile so change one or two lines
> wouldn't be a big deal ...

I'm just saying that the change you requested requires convincing
upstream to accept a change and might require lots of other bits to be
changed not limited to other build systems and/or documentation.

I don't think that onus should be placed on a recipe author. That
being said, I think what you suggested is probably the right thing to
do but sometimes other priorities will come first ;)

-M