On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:22 AM, Nikolay Dimitrov <picmaster@mail.bg> wrote:

On 08/19/2015 04:31 PM, Ann Thornton wrote:

This packagegroup contains benchmarks in 2 groupings: core and extended
so that the benchmarks needed can be chosen more easily.  This makes it
easier for an image recipe to add benchmarks without having to be an
expert on them.

Signed-off-by: Ann Thornton <ra43240@freescale.com>
---
  .../packagegroups/packagegroup-fsl-benchmark.bb    | 29
++++++++++++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644
recipes-fsl/packagegroups/packagegroup-fsl-benchmark.bb

diff --git a/recipes-fsl/packagegroups/packagegroup-fsl-benchmark.bb
b/recipes-fsl/packagegroups/packagegroup-fsl-benchmark.bb
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..99b8f5a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes-fsl/packagegroups/packagegroup-fsl-benchmark.bb
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# Copyright (C) 2015 Freescale Semiconductor
+# Released under the MIT license (see COPYING.MIT for the terms)
+
+SUMMARY = "Freescale Package group for benchmarks"
+LICENSE = "MIT"
+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM =
"file://${COREBASE}/LICENSE;md5=3f40d7994397109285ec7b81fdeb3b58 \
+
file://${COREBASE}/meta/COPYING.MIT;md5=3da9cfbcb788c80a0384361b4de20420"
+
+inherit packagegroup
+
+PACKAGES = "${PN}-core ${PN}-extended"
+
+FSL_NEON = "${@bb.utils.contains('TUNE_FEATURES', 'neon', 'cpuburn-neon',
'', d)}"
+
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-core = "\
+    iperf \
+    iozone3 \
+    lmbench \
+"
+
+RDEPENDS_${PN}-extended = " \
+    bonnie++ \
+    dbench \
+    fio \
+    nbench-byte \
+    tiobench \
+    ${FSL_NEON} \
+    ${PN}-core \
+"
\ No newline at end of file

Can you please exclude "fio" from RDEPENDS_${PN}-extended, at least for
ARM boards? Here's more info about the issue:

https://github.com/Freescale/meta-fsl-demos/commit/836bdf5a9d500ed258f1ddc07d89eca74a704098

This is the very same packagegroup as
packagegroup-fsl-tools-benchmark; there are two differences though:

 a. it is split in core and extended
 b. it includes fio

The core and extended for a benchmark packagegroup seems pointless as
both offer same functionality. So I think what we have is more
suitable for general use.

I thus ask you to remove this patch for next patchset. The 'fio'
package has been removed on purpose as it was causing builds to fail
so if it needs to be added back a more careful test needs to be done
before reverting the patch which has removed it.