From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72444C3ABBE for ; Thu, 8 May 2025 20:39:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lelvem-ot02.ext.ti.com (lelvem-ot02.ext.ti.com [198.47.23.235]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.6401.1746736793993267003 for ; Thu, 08 May 2025 13:39:54 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17Q1 header.b=PkNbsRjn; spf=pass (domain: ti.com, ip: 198.47.23.235, mailfrom: rs@ti.com) Received: from fllv0034.itg.ti.com ([10.64.40.246]) by lelvem-ot02.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 548KdUAE1970972 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 8 May 2025 15:39:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1746736771; bh=RZ8TFumDph+nkv/M7W6MltmUi+2H2JbmfFRPPEiAtzU=; h=Date:To:CC:Subject:From:References:In-Reply-To; b=PkNbsRjnbWm5pPf4SLZS3aqedC+nD35vc6sXE82ynIP1r27xiY5ZR9V3gbnodWOEy eF9XQe0JTyw7Wqt21Bb1399fZyta8WrV/3Kwa1HApYKVgCY7mGY0S5ZhI6dDsW4Xfs OE2Nxn4376r2/ts8l3nwqjSWD0w2M/7cTqCdbAG8= Received: from DFLE115.ent.ti.com (dfle115.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.36]) by fllv0034.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 548KdUwv081396 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 8 May 2025 15:39:30 -0500 Received: from DFLE103.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.24) by DFLE115.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Thu, 8 May 2025 15:39:30 -0500 Received: from lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.249) by DFLE103.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 8 May 2025 15:39:30 -0500 Received: from localhost (rs-desk.dhcp.ti.com [128.247.81.144]) by lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 548KdUjc075490; Thu, 8 May 2025 15:39:30 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 15:39:30 -0500 Message-ID: To: , Alexander Kanavin CC: Mathieu Dubois-Briand , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [oe-core][PATCHv2 0/3] Display manager proposal for x11 and wayland From: Randolph Sapp X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.1-0-g2ecb8770224a References: <20250505224801.3181046-1-rs@ti.com> <183D59758C0F13FA.9842@lists.openembedded.org> In-Reply-To: <183D59758C0F13FA.9842@lists.openembedded.org> X-C2ProcessedOrg: 333ef613-75bf-4e12-a4b1-8e3623f5dcea List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Thu, 08 May 2025 20:39:57 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/216163 On Wed May 7, 2025 at 3:42 PM CDT, Randolph Sapp via lists.openembedded.org= wrote: > On Wed May 7, 2025 at 8:37 AM CDT, Alexander Kanavin wrote: >> On Wed, 7 May 2025 at 01:03, Randolph Sapp via lists.openembedded.org >> wrote: >> >>> Ah, this is the first I hearing about the gnux32 triplet. Well, that is= being >>> filtered out by COMPATIBLE_HOST in the goarch bbclass. Some of those va= lues seem >>> to be invalid now (powerpc64 is supported upstream). That being said, I= don't >>> see any mention of the new x32 ABI upstream. Not entirely sure how to a= ddress >>> that at the moment. >> >> There are two options: >> >> - set up the x32 build as specified in [1], replicate the fail, tweak >> COMPATIBLE_HOST as needed (in a separate commit) and see if any >> further issues come up. >> >> - correct [1] to no longer build core-image-sato for x32, and replace >> it with core-image-full-cmdline, reducing x32 to non-graphical >> targets. It's been a controversial target for a long time, as no one >> has ever seen actual usage of it, and there's been a stream of >> graphical related crashes and build failures. We keep it around for >> now, but I'd fully support dropping the graphics and leaving only the >> console images. >> >> [1] https://git.yoctoproject.org/yocto-autobuilder-helper/tree/config.js= on#n867 >> >> Alex > > Alright, well I did a little work poking around go. It has no understandi= ng of > the x32 ABI currently. Dropping the x32 tests from core-image-sato to > core-image-full-cmdline can work, but that does mask a bit of a regressio= n. > > As useful as a display manager will be, I'm not sure I can justify that m= uch of > a regression for an entire ABI. I know the linux kernel has debated about > dropping x32 support a number of times, GCC seems to be the only compiler= that > has fully implemented it, and Yocto is one of 3 listed distro solutions t= hat > currently support it. Still feels a little rough. I don't know. > > Anyone got any strong opinions here? Well, I guess we'll go with a old fashioned scream test. Let me know if the= re are any other issues that need to be addressed or if I need to resubmit thi= s series if the following is accepted. https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto-patches/message/1539