Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] rm_work.bbclass: clean up sooner

[Mike Crowe <mac@mcrowe.com>]

On Wednesday 08 February 2017 at 14:04:42 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 11:50 +0000, Mike Crowe wrote:
> > On Friday 13 January 2017 at 15:52:33 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > The right solution is to inject do_rm_work before do_build and after
> > > all tasks of the recipe. Achieving that depends on the new bitbake
> > > bb.event.RecipeTaskPreProcess and bb.build.preceedtask().
> > 
> > We've run into trouble with this change. We have a number of custom
> > ancillary tasks that are used to generate source release files and run
> > package tests. No other tasks (including do_build) depend on these tasks
> > since they are run explicitly when required using bitbake -c; either
> > directly or via a recrdeptask.
> > 
> > Running a single task continues to work correctly - presumably this is
> > because the do_build task is not being run, so its dependencies (including
> > rm_work) aren't run either.
> > 
> > Running via the recrdeptask fails. This is because for any particular
> > recipe we end up depending on both do_build and the source release tasks.
> > There's nothing to stop do_rm_work running before (or even during!) one of
> > the source release tasks.
> 
> Can you show how you use recrdeptask and how you call bitbake to trigger
> those extra tasks, just for my understanding?

Certainly, we have a bbclass globally in INHERIT that contains:

 addtask source_release # potential fix here
 do_source_release() {
     :
 }

 addtask all_source_releases
 xx_do_all_source_releases() {
     :
 }

 do_all_source_releases[nostamp] = "1"
 do_all_source_releases[recrdeptask] += "do_all_source_releases do_source_release"

 addtask husk_recipe before do_source_release
 python xx_do_husk_recipe() {
    ...
 }

 (there's also another task similar to do_husk_recipe)

and in the particular recipe that has trouble with racing against rm_work:

 do_husk_recipe() {
    # do stuff in ${WORKDIR}
 }
 addtask husk_recipe after do_populate_sysroot before do_source_release

there's also a source-release-world recipe that contains:

 DEPENDS = "our-image"

and we run:

 bitbake -c all_source_releases source-release-world

> I suppose it worked before because your tasks could depend on do_build
> without triggering do_rm_work, while now that is included.

I believe so.

> > It seems that we need to ensure that do_rm_work also needs to depend on our
> > ancillary tasks too, but only if they are being built. I'm unsure how this
> > can be done though. :(
> 
> How do you determine whether the tasks need to run? Does it depend on
> how bitbake is invoked or does it depend on specific properties of the
> recipe?

Running bitbake as above.

I think that I could fix this by changing:

 addtask source_release

to

 addtask source_release before do_rm_work

(and also fixing any other tasks that suffer from this problem)

but I was hoping that there was a better fix to rm_work.bbclass itself.

Thanks.

Mike.