Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Crowe <mac@mcrowe.com>
To: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] native.bbclass: Override TARGET_ flags too
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:07:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140416100726.GA10280@mcrowe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19970662.Q9VEOkvyDS@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com>

On Wednesday 16 April 2014 at 10:59:27 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 10:53:59 Mike Crowe wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 April 2014 at 10:49:48 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 16 April 2014 10:31:36 Mike Crowe wrote:
> > > > TARGET_LDFLAGS is currently defined in bitbake.conf to contain
> > > > ${TARGET_LINK_HASH_STYLE} which differs between MIPS and other
> > > > targets. Since TARGET_LDFLAGS is an exported variable it affects the
> > > > hash
> > > > of every shell task even if it is not used.
> > > > 
> > > > We don't want native recipe tasks to have different hashes purely
> > > > because
> > > > they happen to have been built in order to satisfy dependencies for
> > > > different MACHINEs since this causes lots of churn in the native sysroot
> > > > when switching between MACHINEs.
> > > > 
> > > > Making native.bbclass override TARGET_LDFLAGS to use BUILD_LDFLAGS
> > > > ensures
> > > > consistent hashes and is a sensible thing to be doing anyway.
> > > 
> > > Just to be clear, for a native recipe how is TARGET_LDFLAGS entering the
> > > signatures? AIUI there ought to be indirection such that LDFLAGS is used
> > > and that is set from BUILD_LDFLAGS for a native recipe rather than
> > > TARGET_LDFLAGS.
> > 
> > Because TARGET_LDFLAGS is an exported variable. LDFLAGS is set from
> > TARGET_LDFLAGS but (prior to this patch) only LDFLAGS is set to
> > BUILD_LDFLAGS; TARGET_LDFLAGS remains unchanged.
> > 
> > See thread "export TARGET_LDFLAGS and native sstate"
> > <20140407155333.GA19351@mcrowe.com> .
> > 
> > Should I improve the commit message?
> 
> Sorry, I had missed the other thread. If it's exported then we probably do 
> need it to have the correct value.
> 
> Since this doesn't look like something recent though I'd like to understand 
> why it being effectively wrong hasn't been an issue up to this point.

Perhaps few people are building in the same source tree for both MIPS and
non-MIPS. I don't think you'd notice otherwise.

Even then we only noticed because it seems to be a good way provoke races
in building whilst unpopulating the sysroot (e.g. my recent fix for
cmake-native vs libacl.)

Thanks.

Mike.


  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-16 10:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-16  9:31 [PATCH] native.bbclass: Override TARGET_ flags too Mike Crowe
2014-04-16  9:49 ` Paul Eggleton
2014-04-16  9:53   ` Mike Crowe
2014-04-16  9:59     ` Paul Eggleton
2014-04-16 10:07       ` Mike Crowe [this message]
2014-04-16 23:00       ` Khem Raj

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140416100726.GA10280@mcrowe.com \
    --to=mac@mcrowe.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox