From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com [87.81.244.161]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0499770AF for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 22:31:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id t91MUqBO011419; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 23:31:16 +0100 Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id kGuDICBT0qsG; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 23:31:16 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id t91MV1UP011431 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 1 Oct 2015 23:31:12 +0100 Message-ID: <1443738661.14733.71.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: Richard Purdie To: Mark Hatle Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 23:31:01 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1443723968-43906-1-git-send-email-mark.hatle@windriver.com> References: <1443723968-43906-1-git-send-email-mark.hatle@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11-0ubuntu3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: david.reyna@windriver.com, openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] "Finish" the IMAGE_GEN_DEBUGFS implementation X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:31:19 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 13:26 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > It was noticed today that the IMAGE_GEN_DEBUGFS implementation was not > complete. The version that was merged back in May only contained the > filesystem generation pieces, but not the pieces for creating the image > from that filesystem. > > The code has been tested and is working. The only thing that I don't > particularly like is that the processing code and loop is a duplicate of > the code that runs just before. Unfortunately the only way around this > is to change the way that way the parallel bits are processed to support > multiple datastores.. (or create "another" function..) > > Any feedback appreciated, but without this the feature is broken! Could we not make a function which these two code points then call? Cheers, Richard