Re: [oe] Adding support for additional qemu machine configurations
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Elvis Dowson wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to put forward a proposal for adding support for additional > qemu machine configurations, either by way of creating a new meta-qemu layer, > or adding additional machine configurations to the oe-core, targetting a > future release (say 1.6 or 1.7). > I'm all for more machine emulations, I'll repeat a few things that I've mentioned before, since I think half of my email were bouncing. If the goal is oe-core, at some point, taking the conversation to the oe-core list makes sense. Since getting a machine into oe-core brings with it a set of QA standards and resources requirements that a few organizations and people need to agree to. But enough of that boring stuff, onto more interesting things. As I've mentioned before, I've poked and booted many of the system platforms in the past .. searching for options to either quickly debug problems or just try things out. So i can lend a hand in knowing what pitfalls are lurking, and making sure that a valid kernel and set of features can be counted on to work on a given board. > Proposed qemu machine configurations, not currently included in oe-core, are > as follows: > > - qemuarmv7 (useful for emulating TI OMAP 3 based platforms) > - qemuarma9 (useful for emulating TI OMAP 4 and Freescale i.MX6 platforms) > - qemuarmv8 (for AArch64 platforms) > - qemumips64 qemumips64 is fully in oe-core now, I have the bugs and maintenance scars to show for it :) Khem and I collaborated on the toolchain, userspace and kernel work to get it to a point where it was fairly easy to get into the core, following a similar model here would probably work as well. A better addition to the list would be a more modern ppc plaform, I've off and on looked at the freescale boards, but most of the FSL based qemu support needs KVM backing. Which isn't a dig at the support, it just doesn't make it an option for a system emulated and supported board. The existing qemuarm support in oe-core is based on the rusty old arm_versatile_926ejs board. And it's showing its ago now. Witness the long drawn out conversations that have been going on in the arm kernel mailing list and crossing into the kernel summit about the interrupt swizzling and other issues that we've had to deal with in supporting the emulated platform. I'd be happy to upgrade and update the support to a newer arm variant, but we'd want to do it for a real advantage. The point being, that maintaining the boards over time, isn't always as simple as it seems, and definitely not as simple as getting that first boot to work. The question you need to answer for each board would be, something like: - Is it based on a h/w BSP, and can that same h/w BSP be used on the emulated plaform as well as the hardware. i.e. I always thought it was cool to boot the same images on hardware and sim, and IIRC with the right qemu upstreams you can do that for boards like the beagleboard and I know you can do it for the zynq. - Make sure it has a decent set of peripherals and supported devices. Graphics, disk and network boot are the obvious front runners for a good choice. With those, you can boot easily from ext3 images, transfer files to and from it easily and test graphical support via sato or other interfaces. USB and other buses are another thing to consider. - Do you keep the platform the same, and simply change the cpu, and if so that's an easier route to the support you mention above. That would mean that you can test userspace tuning and builds, as well as the generic kernel for the tuning, but you aren't testing device drivers or anything targeted to a particular platform/board. This is also fine .. just something to state up front in the goals of offering variants within a particular architecture. And then make sure the value of the variants are valuable enough and try and drive a one or two into the core. > > As a first step, I can contribute support for qemuarmv7, qemuarma9 and > qemuarmv8. And I'm happy to help with configs and a consistent kernel base for them, which in the process will only help them into the core, and iron out any clunky parts of the process. We'd also want to work on getting runqemu hooks and extensibility changes ready so they could be easily maintained in a layer, which helps everyone that has emulated boards in layers. Sorry for the long winded email, this is one of my favourite topics :) Cheers, Bruce > > Thanks and do let me know your thoughts on this. > > Best regards, > > Elvis Dowson > ___ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end" ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openemb
[oe] Adding support for additional qemu machine configurations
Hi, I'd like to put forward a proposal for adding support for additional qemu machine configurations, either by way of creating a new meta-qemu layer, or adding additional machine configurations to the oe-core, targetting a future release (say 1.6 or 1.7). Proposed qemu machine configurations, not currently included in oe-core, are as follows: - qemuarmv7 (useful for emulating TI OMAP 3 based platforms) - qemuarma9 (useful for emulating TI OMAP 4 and Freescale i.MX6 platforms) - qemuarmv8 (for AArch64 platforms) - qemumips64 As a first step, I can contribute support for qemuarmv7, qemuarma9 and qemuarmv8. Thanks and do let me know your thoughts on this. Best regards, Elvis Dowson ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] Yocto Dev Day Sponsorship Opportunity
Hi Philip, On Thursday 29 August 2013 09:45:10 Philip Balister wrote: > This is kind of short notice, but I'd like some feedback on this idea ... > > So for the Yocto Dev Day before ELCE in Edinburgh, the Yocto Project is > looking for additional Sponsorship to cover the cost of coffee breaks > (and some other stuff, but these are the least expensive) > > I'm wondering if OpenEmbedded would like to sponsor a coffee break. > Obviously, we'd need to do a quick round of fund raising to make this > happen. I think it would be a good way for us to increase visibility of > the OpenEmbedded brand and gives many of the smaller players a chance to > contribute to some of the larger Yocto Project costs. > > So I'd like to hear two things from everyone: > > 1) Should we sponsor events when it makes sense? If possible, I think so. > 2) If you are interested in helping sponsor this particular even, send > me a private email with amounts. If there is sufficient interest we have > access to US and EU bank accounts for money collection. If we're able to raise the asking amount then I'd be happy to put some of my own money towards this. > Long term, I'd like to get a more organized fund raising plan in place > and identify how we can support the needs of the project better. Some > ideas that have been tossed around over the years, travel grants for > people promoting OE, event sponsorship, pay for infrastructure > improvements, contribute to auto builder costs etc. Many of these are > being covered by volunteers working in the community It would be nice to > help them out. Travel grants is a good one - not something I'd personally take advantage of but I know it's been helpful getting folks along to conferences to meet with other OE community members in the past. We've also had some infrastructure concerns over the last year or so but I don't know if it's money that's really the big problem there - seems to be more about people's time. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [meta-oe]recipes-devtools/cloud9/cloud9_0.6.bb,do_fetch fails
Dale Schaafsma hotmail.com> writes: > > All, My apologies if this is not the correct place to send this...please let me know where it should be sent. > The cloud9 image for the BeagleBoneBlack doesn't currently build for me as the sass.js git repo no longer > seems to exist. The following is the offending line in recipes- devtools/cloud9/cloud9_0.6.bb: > git://github.com/visionmedia/sass.js.git;destsuffix=git/support/connect/suppor t/sass;name=sass \ > Searching github found this repository, but I'm not sure if this is an appropriate replacement (I'm not > familiar with sass). https://github.com/stunti/sass.js > Thanks,Dale > All, The stunti location won't work (doesn't contain required commit). The following repository seems to work: git://github.com/matehat/sass.js.git I'll try to pull together a proper patch request, but it'll be a bit (due to unfamiliarity and other commitments). Thanks, Dale ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] qt-creator: update to 2.8.1
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 08:37:38PM +1000, Jonathan Liu wrote:
> On 30/08/2013 7:01 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:55:51AM +1000, Jonathan Liu wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu
> >> ---
> >> .../qt-creator/{qt-creator_2.8.0.bb => qt-creator_2.8.1.bb} |
> >> 4 ++--
> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >> rename meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/{qt-creator_2.8.0.bb =>
> >> qt-creator_2.8.1.bb} (87%)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
> >> b/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
> >> similarity index 87%
> >> rename from meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
> >> rename to meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
> >> index a95ad5a..21d5264 100644
> >> --- a/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
> >> +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
> >> @@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM =
> >> "file://LGPL_EXCEPTION.TXT;md5=eb6c371255e1262c55ae9b652a90b5
> >> SECTION = "qt/app"
> >>
> >> SRC_URI =
> >> "http://download.qt-project.org/official_releases/qtcreator/2.8/${PV}/${BP}-src.tar.gz";
> >> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "5aacdad4491b7dda9758a81384d8da79"
> >> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
> >> "7ac5d9a36c2f561f74d77378d4eae95a78c7752b323e1df924d6e895e99f45d2"
> >> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "79ef6c6ece0c00035ef744c9d6e3bd3b"
> >> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
> >> "d5ae007a297a4288d0e95fd605edbfb8aee80f6788c7a6cfb9cb297f50c364b9"
> > Hi, does it fix build on arm?
> I tested for x86 target. I haven't tested on ARM.
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,61264 hasn't been merged yet
> and I don't see any ARM build fixes in the logs between v2.8.0 and
> v2.8.1 so I am guessing compiling for ARM isn't fixed yet.
> >
> > One issue was missing cpuid.h
> > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2013-August/091952.html
> >
> > and then there were some warning causing build failure with -Werror.
> Is -Werror standard or added through a conf option?
I haven't spent much time on this one so I don't know from where -Werror
was passed, but you can see the error in
http://logs.nslu2-linux.org/buildlogs/oe/oe-shr-core-branches/log.world.20130829_131018.log/min_failed/qt-creator
|
/home/jenkins/oe/shr-core-branches/shr-core/tmp-eglibc/sysroots/qemuarm/usr/include/qt4/QtCore/qsharedpointer_impl.h:336:11:
error: 'product' may be used uninitialized in this function
[-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] qt-creator: update to 2.8.1
On 30/08/2013 7:01 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:55:51AM +1000, Jonathan Liu wrote:
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu
---
.../qt-creator/{qt-creator_2.8.0.bb => qt-creator_2.8.1.bb} | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
rename meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/{qt-creator_2.8.0.bb =>
qt-creator_2.8.1.bb} (87%)
diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
b/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
similarity index 87%
rename from meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
rename to meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
index a95ad5a..21d5264 100644
--- a/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
+++ b/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
@@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM =
"file://LGPL_EXCEPTION.TXT;md5=eb6c371255e1262c55ae9b652a90b5
SECTION = "qt/app"
SRC_URI = "http://download.qt-project.org/official_releases/qtcreator/2.8/${PV}/${BP}-src.tar.gz";
-SRC_URI[md5sum] = "5aacdad4491b7dda9758a81384d8da79"
-SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
"7ac5d9a36c2f561f74d77378d4eae95a78c7752b323e1df924d6e895e99f45d2"
+SRC_URI[md5sum] = "79ef6c6ece0c00035ef744c9d6e3bd3b"
+SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
"d5ae007a297a4288d0e95fd605edbfb8aee80f6788c7a6cfb9cb297f50c364b9"
Hi, does it fix build on arm?
I tested for x86 target. I haven't tested on ARM.
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,61264 hasn't been merged yet
and I don't see any ARM build fixes in the logs between v2.8.0 and
v2.8.1 so I am guessing compiling for ARM isn't fixed yet.
One issue was missing cpuid.h
http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2013-August/091952.html
and then there were some warning causing build failure with -Werror.
Is -Werror standard or added through a conf option?
If yes, I'll happily replace my patch with this one :).
Regards,
Jonathan
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [meta-oe][PATCH V4 ] daq: add recipe
From: Chunrong Guo
*The dump DAQ test the various inline mode features
*snort depends daq
Signed-off-by: Chunrong Guo
---
meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/daq_2.0.1.bb | 16 +++
...le-run-test-program-while-cross-compiling.patch | 29
2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/daq_2.0.1.bb
create mode 100644
meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/files/disable-run-test-program-while-cross-compiling.patch
diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/daq_2.0.1.bb
b/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/daq_2.0.1.bb
new file mode 100644
index 000..4c1be44
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/daq_2.0.1.bb
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+DESCRIPTION = "The dump DAQ test the various inline mode features "
+HOMEPAGE = "http://www.snort.org";
+LICENSE = "GPLv2"
+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=f9ce51a65dd738dc1ae631d8b21c40e0"
+
+PARALLEL_MAKE = ""
+
+DEPENDS = "libpcap libpcre "
+
+SRC_URI = "http://fossies.org/linux/misc/daq-${PV}.tar.gz \
+file://disable-run-test-program-while-cross-compiling.patch "
+
+SRC_URI[md5sum] = "044aa3663d44580d005293eeb8ccf175"
+SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
"ebba87c2ec76ac65d2980934423b0597909caead3a86ce5d1ba1ea6ce518ec6d"
+
+inherit autotools
diff --git
a/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/files/disable-run-test-program-while-cross-compiling.patch
b/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/files/disable-run-test-program-while-cross-compiling.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000..12a6cba
--- /dev/null
+++
b/meta-oe/recipes-connectivity/daq/files/disable-run-test-program-while-cross-compiling.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+Upstream-Status:Inappropriate [embedded specific]
+
+fix the below error:
+configure: error: cannot run test program while cross compiling
+
+Signed-off-by: Chunrong Guo
+
+--- a/m4/sf.m4old 2013-08-30 04:08:18.768409680 -0500
b/m4/sf.m4 2013-08-30 04:09:24.591367890 -0500
+@@ -135,19 +135,6 @@
+ exit 1
+ fi
+ AC_MSG_CHECKING([for libpcap version >= $1])
+-AC_RUN_IFELSE(
+-[AC_LANG_PROGRAM(
+-[[
+-#include
+-#include
+-extern char pcap_version[];
+-]],
+-[[
+-if (strcmp(pcap_version, $1) < 0)
+-return 1;
+-]])],
+-[libpcap_version_1x="yes"],
+-[libpcap_version_1x="no"])
+ if test "x$libpcap_version_1x" = "xno"; then
+ AC_MSG_RESULT(no)
+ echo
--
1.7.5.4
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] qt-creator: update to 2.8.1
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:55:51AM +1000, Jonathan Liu wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu
> ---
> .../qt-creator/{qt-creator_2.8.0.bb => qt-creator_2.8.1.bb} | 4
> ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> rename meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/{qt-creator_2.8.0.bb =>
> qt-creator_2.8.1.bb} (87%)
>
> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
> b/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
> similarity index 87%
> rename from meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
> rename to meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
> index a95ad5a..21d5264 100644
> --- a/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.0.bb
> +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-qt/qt-creator/qt-creator_2.8.1.bb
> @@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM =
> "file://LGPL_EXCEPTION.TXT;md5=eb6c371255e1262c55ae9b652a90b5
> SECTION = "qt/app"
>
> SRC_URI =
> "http://download.qt-project.org/official_releases/qtcreator/2.8/${PV}/${BP}-src.tar.gz";
> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "5aacdad4491b7dda9758a81384d8da79"
> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
> "7ac5d9a36c2f561f74d77378d4eae95a78c7752b323e1df924d6e895e99f45d2"
> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "79ef6c6ece0c00035ef744c9d6e3bd3b"
> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
> "d5ae007a297a4288d0e95fd605edbfb8aee80f6788c7a6cfb9cb297f50c364b9"
Hi, does it fix build on arm?
One issue was missing cpuid.h
http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2013-August/091952.html
and then there were some warning causing build failure with -Werror.
If yes, I'll happily replace my patch with this one :).
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
