From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Greylist: delayed 550 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at layers.openembedded.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 18:53:43 UTC Received: from smtp06.online.nl (smtp06.online.nl [194.134.42.51]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570AA7230B for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 18:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp06.online.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp06.online.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6878F96413; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:44:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.7] (s55969068.adsl.online.nl [85.150.144.104]) by smtp06.online.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:44:31 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <54761F8F.9000400@topic.nl> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:44:31 +0100 From: Mike Looijmans Organization: Topic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Eggleton References: <54758D01.3070601@topic.nl> <12654718.RPpo1aQ4TE@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com> <5475D3AE.1040803@topic.nl> <1920393.GFIm8gtWQZ@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1920393.GFIm8gtWQZ@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com> X-Online-Scanned: by Cloudmark authority (on smtp06.online.nl) Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: Why does building an image for machine X delete the bootloader for machine Y? 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: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 18:53:47 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/26/2014 03:57 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Wednesday 26 November 2014 14:20:46 Mike Looijmans wrote: >> On 11/26/2014 12:31 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: >>> Hi Mike, >>> >>> On Wednesday 26 November 2014 09:19:13 Mike Looijmans wrote: >>>> I do a: >>>> >>>> MACHINE=X bitbake my-image >>>> >>>> This DEPENDS on a virtual bootloader, which will produce a BOOT.BIN file >>>> in >>>> the deploy directory, which is tmp-glibc/deploy.images/X/ >>>> >>>> If I then do a: >>>> >>>> MACHINE=Y bitbake my-image >>>> >>>> the BOOT.BIN in tmp-glibc/deploy.images/X/ is suddenly gone! >>>> >>>> If i do a >>>> >>>> MACHINE=X bitbake my-image >>>> >>>> then the the BOOT.BIN in tmp-glibc/deploy.images/Y/ is suddenly gone, and >>>> the one for the X machine appears again. The bootloader recipe is not >>>> being >>>> rebuilt at all. >>>> >>>> The machines have the same MACHINE_ARCH, they differ on only minor points >>>> (the FPGA). >>>> >>>> What is going on here? >>> >>> I can't be sure, but my guess is the recipe is not marked as being >>> machine- >>> specific (i.e. PACKAGE_ARCH is not set to "${MACHINE_ARCH}" - is that the >>> case?) but there is still some variable dependency on a variable that has >>> a machine-specific value. If it's not obvious from the recipe, check if >>> there are two sets of tasks for the bootloader recipe in the sstate >>> cache, and then use bitbake-diffsigs to compare the sigdata/siginfo >>> files. >> >> MACHINE is actually "topic-miami-florida-med-xc7z015" or >> "topic-miami-florida-med-xc7z030" >> >> Both machines have MACHINE_ARCH = "topic_miami_florida_med" since they only >> differ in the FPGA subsystem, but share all the rest (kernel, bootloader, >> etc). >> >> Is it forbidden to share $MACHINE_ARCH between $MACHINEs? (And if so, why >> does MACHINE_ARCH even exist?) > > I don't know for sure, but I don't think that is forbidden. I'm not sure > that's the issue here though. > >> The BSP layer for the topic-miami machines is here (yes, you can build OE or >> Yocto images with it, but I have yet some more work to do to make it a >> proper BSP...): >> https://github.com/topic-embedded-products/meta-topic > > Is it u-boot that's the actual bootloader we are talking about here? Yep. u-boot-spl to be exact. The BOOT.bin is just one of the files that disappears, it's the firststage loader built by u-boot. -- Mike Looijmans