Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix builds for MIPS64 N32

[Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>]

On 7/28/15 12:26 PM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> 2015-07-21 18:26 GMT+03:00 Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>:
>> On 7/21/15 9:31 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>>> On 7/21/15 3:23 AM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> 2015-07-20 18:47 GMT+03:00 Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>:
>>>>> Between customer escalations, other work and vacation.. I didn't happen.
>>>>
>>>> No problem, really. I just wanted to be sure that the patches aren't going
>>>> to be lost.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I've started testing it this morning and should have results tomorrow.. (US time).
>>>>
>>>> Thank you very much!
>>>
>>> With master and the four patches I got an error trying to construct the SDK.
>>>
>>> I'm still investigating the error:
>>>
>>> Collected errors:
>>>  * satisfy_dependencies_for: Cannot satisfy the following dependencies for
>>> packagegroup-cross-canadian-qemumips64:
>>>  *      gcc-cross-canadian-mips *       binutils-cross-canadian-mips *
>>> gdb-cross-canadian-mips *
>>>  * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package packagegroup-cross-canadian-qemumips64.
>>>
>>>
>>> My configuration for this particular test was:
>>>
>>> (oe-init-build-env stock w/ the following changes)
>>
>> I've narrowed down the reproducer to just:
>>
>> MACHINE = "qemumips64"
>> require conf/multilib.conf
>> DEFAULTTUNE = "mips64-n32"
>> MULTILIBS = ""
>>
>> (If you remove the require conf/multilib.conf then things work.)
>>
>> I'm going to continue to investigate.
> 
> Any progress on your side? As I failed to reproduce the issue on my side,
> could you please specify:
> 1) what is the exact bitbake command that failed?
> 2) what additional layers do you have enabled in your build?
> 3) is it a cleanroom build, or you have an sstate cache populated with previous
>    build results?
> 4) any additional information that I can use to reproduce the issue on my side?

Recent check-ins have changed some things.  The compile side was working for a
while, but not the compilation side (using it).

I've been working with RP on IRC, and he's come up with some additional patches.
 (including this set of 4..)

So I think the set is fine, it's up to the other pieces that need to mesh with
this to produce the working SDK.

--Mark

>>
>> --Mark
>>
>>> MACHINE = "qemumips64"
>>>
>>> require conf/multilib.conf
>>> DEFAULTTUNE = "mips64-n32"
>>> MULTILIBS = "multilib:lib64 multilib:lib32"
>>> DEFAULTTUNE_virtclass-multilib-lib64 = "mips64"
>>> DEFAULTTUNE_virtclass-multilib-lib32 = "mips32r2"
>>>
>>> # Set RPM_PREFER_ELF_ARCH to configure preferred ABI when using rpm packaging
>>> # backend to generate a rootfs, choices are:
>>> # 1: ELF32 wins
>>> # 2: ELF64 wins
>>> # 4: ELF64 N32 wins (for mips64 or mips64el only)
>>> RPM_PREFER_ELF_ARCH = "4"
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --Mark
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/20/15 7:11 AM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>>>>>> 2015-07-08 15:42 GMT+03:00 Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>:
>>>>>>> On 7/8/15 7:00 AM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2015-07-01 17:02 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>> Quite simple configuration (MIPS64 N32 image) fails to build (see below).
>>>>>>>>> I have verified these patches in both single lib and in multilib cases.
>>>>>>>>> Tri-lib images and SDK for MIPS build fine with these patches.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any comments on this patchset? It would be nice to have N32 ubroken in
>>>>>>>> the current
>>>>>>>> master tree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry, I'm traveling right now and haven't had time to review this.  I should be
>>>>>>> able to get back to the office and test it by the end of the week.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I visually reviewed the patches and I don't object to them going in -- but I'm
>>>>>>> still not sure they are all correct.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Re-ping. I'd like to receive a confirmation from you (and thus get the
>>>>>> patches merged)
>>>>>> or to discuss, what seems wrong to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Mark
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Current situation:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> lumag@nexs:~/OE$ MACHINE=qemumips64n32 bitbake core-image-base
>>>>>>>>> NOTE: Started PRServer with DBfile:
>>>>>>>>> /home/lumag/OE/cache/prserv.sqlite3, IP: 127.0.0.1, PORT: 46391, PID:
>>>>>>>>> 15895
>>>>>>>>> Loading cache: 100%
>>>>>>>>> |########################################################################################################################|
>>>>>>>>> ETA:  00:00:00
>>>>>>>>> Loaded 1302 entries from dependency cache.
>>>>>>>>> NOTE: Resolving any missing task queue dependencies
>>>>>>>>> ERROR: Nothing RPROVIDES 'binutils-cross-canadian-mips64' (but
>>>>>>>>> /home/lumag/OE/sources/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-cross-canadian.bb
>>>>>>>>> RDEPENDS on or otherwise requires it)
>>>>>>>>> NOTE: Runtime target 'binutils-cross-canadian-mips64' is unbuildable,
>>>>>>>>> removing...
>>>>>>>>> Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['binutils-cross-canadian-mips64']
>>>>>>>>> NOTE: Runtime target 'packagegroup-cross-canadian-qemumips64n32' is
>>>>>>>>> unbuildable, removing...
>>>>>>>>> Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was:
>>>>>>>>> ['packagegroup-cross-canadian-qemumips64n32',
>>>>>>>>> 'binutils-cross-canadian-mips64']
>>>>>>>>> ERROR: Required build target 'core-image-base' has no buildable providers.
>>>>>>>>> Missing or unbuildable dependency chain was: ['core-image-base',
>>>>>>>>> 'packagegroup-cross-canadian-qemumips64n32',
>>>>>>>>> 'binutils-cross-canadian-mips64']
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
>