On 19 March 2018 at 01:42, Giordon Stark <kra...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Nathan, > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 6:29 AM Nathan Rossi <nat...@nathanrossi.com> wrote: >> >> On 18 March 2018 at 04:57, Giordon Stark <kra...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Based on Jorge's suggestion (cc'd), I uncommented my lines in >> > device-tree.bbappend to set compatible machine = ".*" for my particular >> > boards as it is being done upstream... and bitbake seems to be happier >> > with >> > that, but then I run into this error >> >> Yes that change was done for rocko. It was done to prevent >> expectations around device-tree supporting machines where the user has >> not provided the device tree files to build, in order to make it clear >> what pieces are needed to build for custom machines. > > > Can you point to the specific change made? It's not clear to me that adding > > COMPATIBLE_MACHINE_my-machine = ".*" > > actually makes this situation clearer, rather than say > > COMPATIBLE_MACHINE_my-machine = "my_machine"
The change that made requirement of COMPATIBLE_MACHINE to be set is: http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-xilinx/commit/?id=eb0abe0230 There is not a lot of difference between the two ways of setting COMPATIBLE_MACHINE as you have described above. Just be careful not to use "_" in machine names, or you will hit issues. > > So I went ahead and set SPL_BINARY = "" to clear it out, and updated > platform-init but then I got a boot-bin recipe related error as well as the > fact that platform-init can't find the ps*init files. I guess a lot of this > is now requiring tighter integration with the SDK which is slightly breaking > my use case.. I don't think there is any integration between the SDK tooling and the platform-init recipe or for that matter the virtual/xilinx-platform-init provider. But u-boot-xlnx will _not_ provide virtual/boot-bin if it does not have the platform-init files, though that is intended in your case. You might need to select a different provider for virtual/boot-bin if you are using the SDK tooling layer and depending on that virtual target. > > I'm currently using the FSBL method at the moment, so I'm doing this via > CROPS (virtual machine + automating the build in continuous integration) and > then taking the bitbake outputs and loading them up into my SDK on a > different machine to make the BOOT.bin. Is this not possible anymore with > all of these changes and requiring the zcu102-zynqmp.conf? Should I just go > one step higher and set all of these things myself manually and drop > platform-init/boot-bin/spl? If you are not building your machine exactly like the zcu102-zynqmp.conf then you are likely better off copying it and modifying it the way you want instead of including it. But looking at your layers master branch it appears you have already made that change. So I am not sure of the exact question you are asking here? Regards, Nathan -- _______________________________________________ meta-xilinx mailing list meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx
