SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

[stephen.lawrence]

Hi,

I'm wondering if SRC_URI has some limitations as to where it will be 
expanded.

I have a bsp with 2 kernel recipes. One for mainline, the other for the 
yocto kernel.
The kernel may be used with some middleware that requires some further 
patches and kernel configuration.
I hoped to isolate these into a separate file that could be easily 
commented in or out from the kernel bb file.
This file would have a SRC_URI += for the patches and a kernel fragment 
.cfg, e.g:
# Add some m/w patches
SRC_URI += " file://some.patch"

# Add some m/w kernel req
SRC_URI += " file://mw-kernel-config.cfg"

I first tried following the bsp tooling example and placed this within a 
scc file but the SRC_URI wasn't picked up.
I most recently tried placing it in an include but had the same result.

I finally tried adding two SRC_URIs directly into the kernel recipe.
The one listing the patches was applied. The one listing the kernel 
fragment was not.

I suspect the kernel fragment issue is down to the fact that a yocto 
kernel recipe is not being used,
i.e. it relies on the yocto kernel meta data mechanism?

Why is the SRC_URI containing the additional patches applied when 
referenced directly in the bb file,
but not when referenced in an include or scc file?

I suspect this has come up before, but I can't find anything in the doc or 
list archives.

I'm using the poky master branch rev 
93c04c16e45a3c8f60f8ffc0b26a78c24bda71da

Thanks for any suggestions. My aim is to get to a point I can upstream the 
bsp.

Cheers

Steve


Stephen  Lawrence, Senior Engineer, Systems, Linux/SDK, Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, SL8 5FH, Bourne End, UK,  Phone:+44 1628 651-789, Fax:+44 1628 651-804, mailto:Stephen.Lawrence@renesas.com, http://www.renesas.eu

This message is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this email (including any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email  and permanently destroy the original without making any copy. Please note that any material and advice from this mail is provided free of charge and shall be used as an example for demonstration purposes only. 
RENESAS MAKES NO WARRANTIES THAT THE USAGE OF INFORMATION OR ADVICE FROM THIS E-MAIL WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (E.G. PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS). RENESAS CANNOT GUARANTEE BUG FREE OPERATION AND THE RECIPIENT WILL USE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE IT ONLY AT HIS OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL RENESAS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE.  The communication with Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd does not amend any written agreement in place. 
 
Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK.  Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.

Re: SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 13-01-28 12:47 PM, stephen.lawrence@renesas.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering if SRC_URI has some limitations as to where it will be
> expanded.
>
> I have a bsp with 2 kernel recipes. One for mainline, the other for the
> yocto kernel.
> The kernel may be used with some middleware that requires some further
> patches and kernel configuration.
> I hoped to isolate these into a separate file that could be easily
> commented in or out from the kernel bb file.
> This file would have a SRC_URI += for the patches and a kernel fragment
> .cfg, e.g:
> # Add some m/w patches
> SRC_URI += " file://some.patch"
>
> # Add some m/w kernel req
> SRC_URI += " file://mw-kernel-config.cfg"
>
> I first tried following the bsp tooling example and placed this within a
> scc file but the SRC_URI wasn't picked up.
> I most recently tried placing it in an include but had the same result.
>
> I finally tried adding two SRC_URIs directly into the kernel recipe.
> The one listing the patches was applied. The one listing the kernel
> fragment was not.
>
> I suspect the kernel fragment issue is down to the fact that a yocto
> kernel recipe is not being used,
> i.e. it relies on the yocto kernel meta data mechanism?

I can confirm this part. Your recipe must inherit kernel-yocto bbclass
if you want the fragment to be applied to the base config. But you can
use linux-yocto-custom, to build your mainline recipe AND have the
fragment work.

>
> Why is the SRC_URI containing the additional patches applied when
> referenced directly in the bb file,
> but not when referenced in an include or scc file?

Keeping the question isolated to just the patch on the SRC_URI is a
good idea to make sure we are talking about the simplest case.

Which type of recipe isn't having the patch applied, the mainline one ?
The linux-yocto one, or both ?

Bruce

>
> I suspect this has come up before, but I can't find anything in the doc or
> list archives.
>
> I'm using the poky master branch rev
> 93c04c16e45a3c8f60f8ffc0b26a78c24bda71da
>
> Thanks for any suggestions. My aim is to get to a point I can upstream the
> bsp.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
>
> Stephen  Lawrence, Senior Engineer, Systems, Linux/SDK, Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, SL8 5FH, Bourne End, UK,  Phone:+44 1628 651-789, Fax:+44 1628 651-804, mailto:Stephen.Lawrence@renesas.com, http://www.renesas.eu
>
> This message is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this email (including any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email  and permanently destroy the original without making any copy. Please note that any material and advice from this mail is provided free of charge and shall be used as an example for demonstration purposes only.
> RENESAS MAKES NO WARRANTIES THAT THE USAGE OF INFORMATION OR ADVICE FROM THIS E-MAIL WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (E.G. PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS). RENESAS CANNOT GUARANTEE BUG FREE OPERATION AND THE RECIPIENT WILL USE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE IT ONLY AT HIS OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL RENESAS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE.  The communication with Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd does not amend any written agreement in place.
>
> Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK.  Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>

Re: SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

[stephen.lawrence]

Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> wrote on 28/01/2013 
18:01:57:
[snip]
> > I suspect the kernel fragment issue is down to the fact that a yocto
> > kernel recipe is not being used,
> > i.e. it relies on the yocto kernel meta data mechanism?
> 
> I can confirm this part. Your recipe must inherit kernel-yocto bbclass
> if you want the fragment to be applied to the base config. But you can
> use linux-yocto-custom, to build your mainline recipe AND have the
> fragment work.

ok sounds hopeful. I'm not familiar with linux-yocto-custom. 
I'll have a dig in the meta tree and google.

> >
> > Why is the SRC_URI containing the additional patches applied when
> > referenced directly in the bb file,
> > but not when referenced in an include or scc file?
> 
> Keeping the question isolated to just the patch on the SRC_URI is a
> good idea to make sure we are talking about the simplest case.
> 
> Which type of recipe isn't having the patch applied, the mainline one ?
> The linux-yocto one, or both ?

Currently I've only tried the mainline one. 

I would need to revert and try again tomorrow, but when the SRC_URI 
containing the additional patches was in an include, I recall the patch
files were not listed in the build prep logs such as do_fetch.
Not surprising in that case, but they were also not copied over into the
git tree of the work area.

So it was as if the include was parsed but the SRC_URI was ignored.

Regards

Steve


Stephen  Lawrence, Senior Engineer, Systems, Linux/SDK, Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, SL8 5FH, Bourne End, UK,  Phone:+44 1628 651-789, Fax:+44 1628 651-804, mailto:Stephen.Lawrence@renesas.com, http://www.renesas.eu

This message is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this email (including any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email  and permanently destroy the original without making any copy. Please note that any material and advice from this mail is provided free of charge and shall be used as an example for demonstration purposes only. 
RENESAS MAKES NO WARRANTIES THAT THE USAGE OF INFORMATION OR ADVICE FROM THIS E-MAIL WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (E.G. PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS). RENESAS CANNOT GUARANTEE BUG FREE OPERATION AND THE RECIPIENT WILL USE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE IT ONLY AT HIS OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL RENESAS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE.  The communication with Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd does not amend any written agreement in place. 
 
Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK.  Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.

Re: SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 13-01-28 01:34 PM, stephen.lawrence@renesas.com wrote:
> Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> wrote on 28/01/2013
> 18:01:57:
> [snip]
>>> I suspect the kernel fragment issue is down to the fact that a yocto
>>> kernel recipe is not being used,
>>> i.e. it relies on the yocto kernel meta data mechanism?
>>
>> I can confirm this part. Your recipe must inherit kernel-yocto bbclass
>> if you want the fragment to be applied to the base config. But you can
>> use linux-yocto-custom, to build your mainline recipe AND have the
>> fragment work.
>
> ok sounds hopeful. I'm not familiar with linux-yocto-custom.
> I'll have a dig in the meta tree and google.

You'll fine a reference recipe in meta-skeleton in the yocto/oe-core
tree.

>
>>>
>>> Why is the SRC_URI containing the additional patches applied when
>>> referenced directly in the bb file,
>>> but not when referenced in an include or scc file?
>>
>> Keeping the question isolated to just the patch on the SRC_URI is a
>> good idea to make sure we are talking about the simplest case.
>>
>> Which type of recipe isn't having the patch applied, the mainline one ?
>> The linux-yocto one, or both ?
>
> Currently I've only tried the mainline one.
>
> I would need to revert and try again tomorrow, but when the SRC_URI
> containing the additional patches was in an include, I recall the patch
> files were not listed in the build prep logs such as do_fetch.
> Not surprising in that case, but they were also not copied over into the
> git tree of the work area.
>
> So it was as if the include was parsed but the SRC_URI was ignored.

I'll try a test here and see what happens in the mean time.

Bruce


>
> Regards
>
> Steve
>
>
> Stephen  Lawrence, Senior Engineer, Systems, Linux/SDK, Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, SL8 5FH, Bourne End, UK,  Phone:+44 1628 651-789, Fax:+44 1628 651-804, mailto:Stephen.Lawrence@renesas.com, http://www.renesas.eu
>
> This message is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this email (including any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email  and permanently destroy the original without making any copy. Please note that any material and advice from this mail is provided free of charge and shall be used as an example for demonstration purposes only.
> RENESAS MAKES NO WARRANTIES THAT THE USAGE OF INFORMATION OR ADVICE FROM THIS E-MAIL WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (E.G. PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS). RENESAS CANNOT GUARANTEE BUG FREE OPERATION AND THE RECIPIENT WILL USE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE IT ONLY AT HIS OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL RENESAS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE.  The communication with Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd does not amend any written agreement in place.
>
> Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK.  Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.
>

Re: SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 13-01-28 01:35 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 13-01-28 01:34 PM, stephen.lawrence@renesas.com wrote:
>> Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> wrote on 28/01/2013
>> 18:01:57:
>> [snip]
>>>> I suspect the kernel fragment issue is down to the fact that a yocto
>>>> kernel recipe is not being used,
>>>> i.e. it relies on the yocto kernel meta data mechanism?
>>>
>>> I can confirm this part. Your recipe must inherit kernel-yocto bbclass
>>> if you want the fragment to be applied to the base config. But you can
>>> use linux-yocto-custom, to build your mainline recipe AND have the
>>> fragment work.
>>
>> ok sounds hopeful. I'm not familiar with linux-yocto-custom.
>> I'll have a dig in the meta tree and google.
>
> You'll fine a reference recipe in meta-skeleton in the yocto/oe-core
> tree.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Why is the SRC_URI containing the additional patches applied when
>>>> referenced directly in the bb file,
>>>> but not when referenced in an include or scc file?
>>>
>>> Keeping the question isolated to just the patch on the SRC_URI is a
>>> good idea to make sure we are talking about the simplest case.
>>>
>>> Which type of recipe isn't having the patch applied, the mainline one ?
>>> The linux-yocto one, or both ?
>>
>> Currently I've only tried the mainline one.
>>
>> I would need to revert and try again tomorrow, but when the SRC_URI
>> containing the additional patches was in an include, I recall the patch
>> files were not listed in the build prep logs such as do_fetch.
>> Not surprising in that case, but they were also not copied over into the
>> git tree of the work area.
>>
>> So it was as if the include was parsed but the SRC_URI was ignored.
>
> I'll try a test here and see what happens in the mean time.

I can confirm that in my simple test, I can have a kernel recipe
linux-<your recipe name>.bbappend in a layer that includes .inc file,
who's only contents are:

SRC_URI += "file://0001-makefile-add-comment.patch"

And I get the patch applied to the tree. Am I understanding correctly ?
or is that different from what you are trying to do?

Bruce


>
> Bruce
>
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> Stephen  Lawrence, Senior Engineer, Systems, Linux/SDK, Renesas
>> Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, SL8 5FH, Bourne
>> End, UK,  Phone:+44 1628 651-789, Fax:+44 1628 651-804,
>> mailto:Stephen.Lawrence@renesas.com, http://www.renesas.eu
>>
>> This message is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may
>> contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are
>> not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
>> dissemination of this email (including any attachments thereto) is
>> strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please
>> notify the sender immediately by telephone or email  and permanently
>> destroy the original without making any copy. Please note that any
>> material and advice from this mail is provided free of charge and
>> shall be used as an example for demonstration purposes only.
>> RENESAS MAKES NO WARRANTIES THAT THE USAGE OF INFORMATION OR ADVICE
>> FROM THIS E-MAIL WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
>> (E.G. PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS). RENESAS CANNOT GUARANTEE BUG FREE
>> OPERATION AND THE RECIPIENT WILL USE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE IT ONLY AT HIS
>> OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL RENESAS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE.  The
>> communication with Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd does not amend any
>> written agreement in place.
>>
>> Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne
>> End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK.  Registered in England & Wales
>> under Registered No. 04586709.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

[stephen.lawrence]

Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> wrote on 28/01/2013 
18:56:02:

> >>>> Why is the SRC_URI containing the additional patches applied when
> >>>> referenced directly in the bb file,
> >>>> but not when referenced in an include or scc file?
> >>>
> >>> Keeping the question isolated to just the patch on the SRC_URI is a
> >>> good idea to make sure we are talking about the simplest case.
> >>>
> >>> Which type of recipe isn't having the patch applied, the mainline 
one ?
> >>> The linux-yocto one, or both ?
> >>
> >> Currently I've only tried the mainline one.
> >>
> >> I would need to revert and try again tomorrow, but when the SRC_URI
> >> containing the additional patches was in an include, I recall the 
patch
> >> files were not listed in the build prep logs such as do_fetch.
> >> Not surprising in that case, but they were also not copied over into 
the
> >> git tree of the work area.
> >>
> >> So it was as if the include was parsed but the SRC_URI was ignored.
> >
> > I'll try a test here and see what happens in the mean time.
> 
> I can confirm that in my simple test, I can have a kernel recipe
> linux-<your recipe name>.bbappend in a layer that includes .inc file,
> who's only contents are:
> 
> SRC_URI += "file://0001-makefile-add-comment.patch"
> 
> And I get the patch applied to the tree. Am I understanding correctly ?
> or is that different from what you are trying to do?
> 

Thank you for taking the time Bruce. Yes, that is essentially what I was 
trying to do. Two SRC_URI += in a .inc, one listing the patches, the other 
just listing a cfg file. The only difference is that as it was a mainline 
kernel recipe I included it from a .bb, not a .bbappend. The .bb inherits 
'kernel'.

I originally had the additional patches in a subdirectory to separate them 
out, but to eliminate file paths as a cause, I moved them in with the main 
patches with no luck. I'll revert the changes and try again so I can 
provide some specific log results.

Steve


Stephen  Lawrence, Senior Engineer, Systems, Linux/SDK, Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, SL8 5FH, Bourne End, UK,  Phone:+44 1628 651-789, Fax:+44 1628 651-804, mailto:Stephen.Lawrence@renesas.com, http://www.renesas.eu

This message is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this email (including any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email  and permanently destroy the original without making any copy. Please note that any material and advice from this mail is provided free of charge and shall be used as an example for demonstration purposes only. 
RENESAS MAKES NO WARRANTIES THAT THE USAGE OF INFORMATION OR ADVICE FROM THIS E-MAIL WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (E.G. PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS). RENESAS CANNOT GUARANTEE BUG FREE OPERATION AND THE RECIPIENT WILL USE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE IT ONLY AT HIS OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL RENESAS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE.  The communication with Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd does not amend any written agreement in place. 
 
Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK.  Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.

Re: SRC_URI scope and kernel fragments in non-yocto kernel recipes

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 13-01-29 06:24 AM, stephen.lawrence@renesas.com wrote:
> Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> wrote on 28/01/2013
> 18:56:02:
>
>>>>>> Why is the SRC_URI containing the additional patches applied when
>>>>>> referenced directly in the bb file,
>>>>>> but not when referenced in an include or scc file?
>>>>>
>>>>> Keeping the question isolated to just the patch on the SRC_URI is a
>>>>> good idea to make sure we are talking about the simplest case.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which type of recipe isn't having the patch applied, the mainline
> one ?
>>>>> The linux-yocto one, or both ?
>>>>
>>>> Currently I've only tried the mainline one.
>>>>
>>>> I would need to revert and try again tomorrow, but when the SRC_URI
>>>> containing the additional patches was in an include, I recall the
> patch
>>>> files were not listed in the build prep logs such as do_fetch.
>>>> Not surprising in that case, but they were also not copied over into
> the
>>>> git tree of the work area.
>>>>
>>>> So it was as if the include was parsed but the SRC_URI was ignored.
>>>
>>> I'll try a test here and see what happens in the mean time.
>>
>> I can confirm that in my simple test, I can have a kernel recipe
>> linux-<your recipe name>.bbappend in a layer that includes .inc file,
>> who's only contents are:
>>
>> SRC_URI += "file://0001-makefile-add-comment.patch"
>>
>> And I get the patch applied to the tree. Am I understanding correctly ?
>> or is that different from what you are trying to do?
>>
>
> Thank you for taking the time Bruce. Yes, that is essentially what I was
> trying to do. Two SRC_URI += in a .inc, one listing the patches, the other
> just listing a cfg file. The only difference is that as it was a mainline
> kernel recipe I included it from a .bb, not a .bbappend. The .bb inherits
> 'kernel'.
>
> I originally had the additional patches in a subdirectory to separate them
> out, but to eliminate file paths as a cause, I moved them in with the main
> patches with no luck. I'll revert the changes and try again so I can
> provide some specific log results.

Sounds good. I (un)fortunately had my tests work here, so I'll wait for
logs and try and help out then!

Cheers,

Bruce

>
> Steve
>
>
> Stephen  Lawrence, Senior Engineer, Systems, Linux/SDK, Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, SL8 5FH, Bourne End, UK,  Phone:+44 1628 651-789, Fax:+44 1628 651-804, mailto:Stephen.Lawrence@renesas.com, http://www.renesas.eu
>
> This message is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this email (including any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email  and permanently destroy the original without making any copy. Please note that any material and advice from this mail is provided free of charge and shall be used as an example for demonstration purposes only.
> RENESAS MAKES NO WARRANTIES THAT THE USAGE OF INFORMATION OR ADVICE FROM THIS E-MAIL WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (E.G. PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS). RENESAS CANNOT GUARANTEE BUG FREE OPERATION AND THE RECIPIENT WILL USE AND/OR DISTRIBUTE IT ONLY AT HIS OWN RISK. IN NO EVENT SHALL RENESAS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE.  The communication with Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd does not amend any written agreement in place.
>
> Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK.  Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.
>