From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UXcfB-0003Vb-Oq for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 01 May 2013 21:26:02 +0200 Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 May 2013 12:08:08 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,590,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="306358384" Received: from envy2.jf.intel.com (HELO envy2.home) ([10.7.199.54]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 May 2013 12:08:07 -0700 Message-ID: <51816817.7080101@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 12:08:07 -0700 From: Darren Hart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Phil Blundell References: <1367244122.14512.124.camel@phil-desktop.brightsign> In-Reply-To: <1367244122.14512.124.camel@phil-desktop.brightsign> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Cc: "openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel.bbclass: Don't include source files for "other" architectures in the sysroot X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 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: Wed, 01 May 2013 19:26:03 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 04/29/2013 07:02 AM, Phil Blundell wrote: > Since the sysroot is per-machine, we can be fairly confident that any > out-of-tree modules which look at our sources will be building for the > same architecture that we are. This being the case there's no need to > ship the sources for any other architectures, which saves disk space and > time (about 30 seconds in do_package, in a somewhat unscientific test > with ARCH=mips). > > Of course, an even better fix would be to not install these files in the > first place, but deleting them is easier. No objection, and reducing kernel related build/package time is a good thing. You've stated that this successfully removes code on mips, have you also tested that basic module building still works? For example, does hello-mod still build? Have you confirmed this on any other architectures? I'd like to see a test at least on the core emulated BSPs (or maybe at least 2 of them) before we pull this in as we have spent quite a bit of effort getting modules building to date, I'd hate to break that due to a lack of testing. > > Signed-off-by: Phil Blundell > --- > meta/classes/kernel.bbclass | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass > index 00e27ef..ffb0b11 100644 > --- a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass > +++ b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass > @@ -167,6 +167,7 @@ kernel_do_install() { > oe_runmake -C $kerneldir CC="${KERNEL_CC}" LD="${KERNEL_LD}" clean > make -C $kerneldir _mrproper_scripts > find $kerneldir -path $kerneldir/lib -prune -o -path $kerneldir/tools -prune -o -path $kerneldir/scripts -prune -o -name "*.[csS]" -exec rm '{}' \; > + rm -rf $(find $kerneldir/arch -maxdepth 1 -not -path $kerneldir/arch/$ARCH -not -path $kerneldir/arch/Kconfig -not -path $kerneldir/arch/. -not -path $kerneldir/arch) Any particular reason for not using "-exec rm" like the other code removal commands here? > find $kerneldir/Documentation -name "*.txt" -exec rm '{}' \; > > # As of Linux kernel version 3.0.1, the clean target removes > Thanks, -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel