Re: [kernel config]: specified values did not make it into the kernel's final configuration

[Liam Maps <cca_liam_maps@mail.com>]

Thank you for the info. But who sets the .config "Requested value" of a 
configuration variable and who then overrides it and sets the "Actual 
value set"? (The quoted text is from the [kernel config] warning.)

After a bit of research this is what I think I know:
For my example when working with the master branch and building for 
BeagleBone, the CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO config value gets set to 512 in the 
meta/cfg/kernel-cache/bsp/beaglebone/beaglebone.cfg. So the beaglebone 
bsp for the kernel.
Somewhere that value then gets set to 0. But I can't find out where and 
by who. Shouldn't the bsp values be the final ones? It's the bsp who 
knows most about the target device after all. Or am I mistaken?

Thank you.


On 04/04/2015 08:10 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Liam Maps <cca_liam_maps@mail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> During the build of a core-image-base for BeagleBone using the master branch
>> I was presented with the following warning:
>>
>> "WARNING: [kernel config]: specified values did not make it into the
>> kernel's final configuration:"
>>
>> The full list of configuration values, which did not make it into kernel's
>> configuration can be found here:
>> http://pastebin.com/sAvXuNC8
>>
>> Most variables seem to have something to do with things which are not
>> applicable for my particular build and device. There is no need for any
>> graphics so values such as CONFIG_FB_CFB_REV_PIXELS_IN_BYTE and
>> CONFIG_FRAMEBUFFER_CONSOLE_DETECT_PRIMARY seem like they are not needed
>> anyway. But there are a few which look less innocent such as for example
>> CONFIG_ARCH_NR_GPIO and CONFIG_LEDS_GPIO.
>>
>> I did a few builds with poky-dizzy-12.0.1 before moving to the master branch
>> and the mentioned warning was not issued during those builds.
>>
>> The only information about the warning I was able to find on the web is
>> this:
>> http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/89289/
>>
>> So it seems that this is not that critical and somewhere during the build
>> process some kernel configuration values are dropped. Since I do not have
>> enough knowledge about the subject I would like to ask the more
>> knowledgeable of you to reassure me that this warning is not critical. Also,
>> if someone could give an example of why some values are dropped and by
>> who/what, I would be most grateful.
> They are just that .. warnings. We have a patch for the beaglebone to clean up
> the input configs, it just didn't make it into master yet.
>
> Old values, values missing dependencies, etc, all may be dropped by the
> kernel configuration phase. The tools detect and warn if this happens, since
> it may be critical (i.e. boot failure) or not .. and if not, it does
> indicate that
> the input configuration fragments need some cleaning.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
>
>
>> I should probably mention that I can successfully deploy the build despite
>> the warnings and everything works as expected. Well, there is one thing and
>> that is that one of requested packages is not built (ntfs-3g) but that is an
>> issue for another thread, if I am unable to find the solution myself.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> FYI: I am new to Yocto and this mailing list
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>
>