* lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean?
@ 2011-03-03 15:45 Koen Kooi
2011-03-03 15:53 ` Khem Raj
2011-03-03 16:22 ` Mark Hatle
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Koen Kooi @ 2011-03-03 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
Hi,
I started noticing a lot of warnings like this:
WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) on /work/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/udev-165-r2/packages-split/udev/sbin/udevd
What do they mean and how can I (help to) fix them?
regards,
Koen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean?
2011-03-03 15:45 lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean? Koen Kooi
@ 2011-03-03 15:53 ` Khem Raj
2011-03-03 16:21 ` Koen Kooi
2011-03-03 16:22 ` Mark Hatle
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Khem Raj @ 2011-03-03 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer; +Cc: Koen Kooi
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I started noticing a lot of warnings like this:
>
> WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) on /work/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/udev-165-r2/packages-split/udev/sbin/udevd
>
> What do they mean and how can I (help to) fix them?
>
Its found due to f17c84c9b1cba52f860752058821b31930674e1a
probably can you post the binary so I can take a look
> regards,
>
> Koen
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean?
2011-03-03 15:53 ` Khem Raj
@ 2011-03-03 16:21 ` Koen Kooi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Koen Kooi @ 2011-03-03 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Khem Raj; +Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
Op 3 mrt 2011, om 16:53 heeft Khem Raj het volgende geschreven:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I started noticing a lot of warnings like this:
>>
>> WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) on /work/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/udev-165-r2/packages-split/udev/sbin/udevd
>>
>> What do they mean and how can I (help to) fix them?
>>
>
> Its found due to f17c84c9b1cba52f860752058821b31930674e1a
> probably can you post the binary so I can take a look
WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) on /work/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/udev-165-r2/packages-split/udev/sbin/udevd
can be found at:
http://dominion.thruhere.net/koen/angstrom/stuff/udevd
regards,
koen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean?
2011-03-03 15:45 lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean? Koen Kooi
2011-03-03 15:53 ` Khem Raj
@ 2011-03-03 16:22 ` Mark Hatle
2011-03-03 16:24 ` Mark Hatle
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Hatle @ 2011-03-03 16:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
On 3/3/11 9:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I started noticing a lot of warnings like this:
>
> WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) on /work/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/udev-165-r2/packages-split/udev/sbin/udevd
If the file is an ELF file, there are specific checks that are performed,
machine type, os type.. and bit size. (I suspect the QA message for all of them
probably need to be improved.)
What I find interesting is it came back as "0". 0 indicates that the elf
comparison loader was never run.. 0 is "unknown". (32 and 64 are obvious values...)
The code that determines the size is in meta/lib/oe/qa.py. The normal use of
the code is from the meta/classes/insane.bbclass function. The fact the
comparison returned a 0 indicates that the qa.py functions did not run. This
could be a bug in meta/lib/oe/qa.py, or it could be that the routine call in
package_qa_walk (in insane.bbclass) failed for some reason and something went
wrong with the exception handler?
> What do they mean and how can I (help to) fix them?
First thing to do is check the binary that is being referenced and verify that
it is infact a valid ARM EABI binary. Assuming it is file, we need to track
down the code likely starting in qa.py and figure out why it didn't determine
the bit size.
--Mark
> regards,
>
> Koen
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean?
2011-03-03 16:22 ` Mark Hatle
@ 2011-03-03 16:24 ` Mark Hatle
2011-03-04 10:46 ` Koen Kooi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Hatle @ 2011-03-03 16:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
I found the issue. Somewhere in a code merge in lib/oe/qa.py "self.bits = 32"
became "self.bits == 32"
lines 43 and 45 are incorrect. I'll submit a patch shortly to resolve this.
--Mark
> On 3/3/11 9:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I started noticing a lot of warnings like this:
>> >
>> > WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) on /work/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/udev-165-r2/packages-split/udev/sbin/udevd
> If the file is an ELF file, there are specific checks that are performed,
> machine type, os type.. and bit size. (I suspect the QA message for all of them
> probably need to be improved.)
>
> What I find interesting is it came back as "0". 0 indicates that the elf
> comparison loader was never run.. 0 is "unknown". (32 and 64 are obvious values...)
>
> The code that determines the size is in meta/lib/oe/qa.py. The normal use of
> the code is from the meta/classes/insane.bbclass function. The fact the
> comparison returned a 0 indicates that the qa.py functions did not run. This
> could be a bug in meta/lib/oe/qa.py, or it could be that the routine call in
> package_qa_walk (in insane.bbclass) failed for some reason and something went
> wrong with the exception handler?
>
>> > What do they mean and how can I (help to) fix them?
> First thing to do is check the binary that is being referenced and verify that
> it is infact a valid ARM EABI binary. Assuming it is file, we need to track
> down the code likely starting in qa.py and figure out why it didn't determine
> the bit size.
>
> --Mark
>
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Koen
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Openembedded-core mailing list
>> > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean?
2011-03-03 16:24 ` Mark Hatle
@ 2011-03-04 10:46 ` Koen Kooi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Koen Kooi @ 2011-03-04 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
I can confirm your patches fixes it, thanks!
Op 3 mrt 2011, om 17:24 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
> I found the issue. Somewhere in a code merge in lib/oe/qa.py "self.bits = 32"
> became "self.bits == 32"
>
> lines 43 and 45 are incorrect. I'll submit a patch shortly to resolve this.
>
> --Mark
>
>> On 3/3/11 9:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I started noticing a lot of warnings like this:
>>>>
>>>> WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) on /work/armv7a-angstrom-linux-gnueabi/udev-165-r2/packages-split/udev/sbin/udevd
>> If the file is an ELF file, there are specific checks that are performed,
>> machine type, os type.. and bit size. (I suspect the QA message for all of them
>> probably need to be improved.)
>>
>> What I find interesting is it came back as "0". 0 indicates that the elf
>> comparison loader was never run.. 0 is "unknown". (32 and 64 are obvious values...)
>>
>> The code that determines the size is in meta/lib/oe/qa.py. The normal use of
>> the code is from the meta/classes/insane.bbclass function. The fact the
>> comparison returned a 0 indicates that the qa.py functions did not run. This
>> could be a bug in meta/lib/oe/qa.py, or it could be that the routine call in
>> package_qa_walk (in insane.bbclass) failed for some reason and something went
>> wrong with the exception handler?
>>
>>>> What do they mean and how can I (help to) fix them?
>> First thing to do is check the binary that is being referenced and verify that
>> it is infact a valid ARM EABI binary. Assuming it is file, we need to track
>> down the code likely starting in qa.py and figure out why it didn't determine
>> the bit size.
>>
>> --Mark
>>
>>>> regards,
>>>>
>>>> Koen
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>>>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>>>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-04 10:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-03 15:45 lots of WARNING: QA Issue: Bit size did not match (32 to 0) warnings, what do they mean? Koen Kooi
2011-03-03 15:53 ` Khem Raj
2011-03-03 16:21 ` Koen Kooi
2011-03-03 16:22 ` Mark Hatle
2011-03-03 16:24 ` Mark Hatle
2011-03-04 10:46 ` Koen Kooi
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox