[OE-core] do_kernel_configme and defconfig

[Bruce Ashfield]

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 3:28 PM, Chris Laplante via Openembedded-core <
openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org> wrote:

> OK, I figured out why this happens. This line in kernel-yocto.bbclass:
>
>
>
> scc --force -o ${S}/${meta_dir}:cfg,merge,meta ${includes}
> ${bsp_definition} ${sccs} ${patches} ${KERNEL_FEATURES}
>
>
>
> … passes the BSP def before the sccs. In my case, the BSP def is
> mymachine.scc, and the sccs is the defconfig. So that’s why the defconfig
> comes after the BSP.
>
>
>
> My takeaway is that a BSP plus a defconfig is not a supported use case. Is
> that correct?
>

A defconfig isn't magic, it is just another input to the configuration
merging. It will be applied as any other fragment. There is some special
processing only a defconfig is specified, but otherwise, it is the same. So
in this case, whatever it sets would be applied after the BSP definition
and would take precedence (last through the gate wins).

If you have a BSP definition, you normally don't have a defconfig. Where is
the defconfig coming from in your scenario ? The SRC_URI ? You can just
include it from the .scc files to control the order, which is what is
expected when you have a BSP definition.

Were you seeing none of your options set ? or something else ?


>
>
> If so, I think it’s important to add some sanity checking to
> kernel-yocto.bbclass.
>
>
>

There's really nothing that could be checked, since the intent of the
fragments isn't known, and for the most part, defconfigs are the same as
any other fragment (from the point of view of the merging).

Bruce


> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> *From:* openembedded-core-bounces at lists.openembedded.org [mailto:
> openembedded-core-bounces at lists.openembedded.org] *On Behalf Of *Chris
> Laplante via Openembedded-core
> *Sent:* Friday, May 11, 2018 2:51 PM
> *To:* openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
> *Cc:* SMITH,JARED (A-Little Falls,ex1) <jared.smith at agilent.com>
> *Subject:* [OE-core] do_kernel_configme and defconfig
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Is it expected for do_kernel_configme to apply the defconfig last (after
> configuration fragments introduced by sccs)?
>
>
>
> For some reason, in the call to merge_config, “.kernel-meta/configs//./defconfig”
> is passed last whereas I’d expect it would be first (since that should be
> the base config). This is causing problems, because config options that my
> config fragments are setting are getting overridden by the defconfig – it
> should be the other way around.
>
>
>
> For reference, I’m using Rocko and have just updated to the latest commit.
> We have an in-tree defconfig, and we set KBUILD_DEFCONFIG_machinename
> appropriately. We are using the separate kernel-meta repository to store
> kernel metadata. I have KMACHINE_machinename set up so that it finds the
> correct BSP definition .scc file. Still seem to be missing something,
> though.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>


-- 
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee
at its end"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20180511/0c1fadb8/attachment-0002.html>