From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D15782E3 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2017 00:46:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Sep 2017 17:46:13 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,438,1500966000"; d="scan'208";a="132277434" Received: from swold-mobl2.jf.intel.com ([10.254.78.59]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Sep 2017 17:46:12 -0700 Message-ID: <1506386772.24844.45.camel@linux.intel.com> From: Saul Wold To: Richard Purdie , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 17:46:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1505981757.18640.155.camel@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20170919182734.15741-1-sgw@linux.intel.com> <20170919182734.15741-2-sgw@linux.intel.com> <1505981757.18640.155.camel@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.5 (3.24.5-1.fc26) Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arch-x86: Add x86-x32 to MACHINEOVERRIDES 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: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 00:46:11 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2017-09-21 at 09:15 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2017-09-19 at 11:27 -0700, Saul Wold wrote: > > This is needed as an x32 more generic x32 override later in the > > OVERRIDES, currently linux-gnux32 is the first override, but we > > need a stronger (later in the list) x32 override to deal with some > > needed x32 dependency overrides. > > > > Signed-off-by: Saul Wold > > --- > > meta/conf/machine/include/x86/arch-x86.inc | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/meta/conf/machine/include/x86/arch-x86.inc > > b/meta/conf/machine/include/x86/arch-x86.inc > > index e51d595f74..31d30b3304 100644 > > --- a/meta/conf/machine/include/x86/arch-x86.inc > > +++ b/meta/conf/machine/include/x86/arch-x86.inc > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ TUNE_LDARGS += "${@bb.utils.contains('TUNE_FEATUR > > ES', 'mx32', '-m elf32_x86_64', > > TUNE_ASARGS += "${@bb.utils.contains('TUNE_FEATURES', 'mx32', '- > > x32', '', d)}" > > # user mode qemu doesn't support x32 > > MACHINE_FEATURES_BACKFILL_CONSIDERED_append = " ${@bb.utils.contai > > ns('TUNE_FEATURES', 'mx32', 'qemu-usermode', '', d)}" > > +MACHINEOVERRIDES =. "${@bb.utils.contains('TUNE_FEATURES', 'mx32', > > 'x86_x32:', '' ,d)}" > > > > # ELF64 ABI > > TUNEVALID[m64] = "IA32e (x86_64) ELF64 standard ABI" > > I was ok with this until I realised the patch does not do what it > says > in the commit message, it adds "x86_x32", not "x86-x32". Since "_" is > the override modifier, I worry about how this reacts with the rest of > the system and I suspect its a bad idea. Is there a reason you didn't > use "x86-x32" (following the example of x86-64)? > Typo, possibly or had not considered the override issue. v2 in flight shortly. Sau! > Cheers, > > Richard