Message ID | 1317270070-14250-7-git-send-email-msm@freescale.com |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d347979 --- /dev/null +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate configuration + +Add bit to detect if we are running on powerpc64 and treat it the +same as ppc64 + +Index: ust-0.15/configure.ac +=================================================================== +--- ust-0.15.orig/configure.ac ++++ ust-0.15/configure.ac +@@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ changequote([,])dnl + x86_64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-x86-64" ;; + powerpc) LIBFORMAT="elf32-powerpc" ;; + ppc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; ++ powerpc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; + s390) LIBFORMAT="elf32-s390" ;; + s390x) LIBFORMAT="elf64-s390" ;; + armv5) LIBFORMAT="elf32-littlearm"; NO_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=1 ;; diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb index 915e619..9dd4658 100644 --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb @@ -10,9 +10,10 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=e647752e045a8c45b6f583771bd561ef \ DEPENDS = "liburcu" -PR = "r2" +PR = "r3" SRC_URI = "http://lttng.org/files/ust/releases/ust-${PV}.tar.gz" +SRC_URI_append_powerpc64 = " file://fix-powerpc64.patch" SRC_URI[md5sum] = "86c71486a70695dc0b2171ad16fc82b3" SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "7ff7ecdc051c0649d5fd21b5ceff4895ca95dc34f14cdc04e50de13cfd1903c5"
On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 23:21 -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote: > Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock <msm@freescale.com> > --- > meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb | 3 ++- > 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..d347979 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate configuration Is this really inappropriate for upstream? It looks reasonable to me... > + > +Add bit to detect if we are running on powerpc64 and treat it the > +same as ppc64 > + > +Index: ust-0.15/configure.ac > +=================================================================== > +--- ust-0.15.orig/configure.ac > ++++ ust-0.15/configure.ac > +@@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ changequote([,])dnl > + x86_64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-x86-64" ;; > + powerpc) LIBFORMAT="elf32-powerpc" ;; > + ppc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; > ++ powerpc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; > + s390) LIBFORMAT="elf32-s390" ;; > + s390x) LIBFORMAT="elf64-s390" ;; > + armv5) LIBFORMAT="elf32-littlearm"; NO_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=1 ;; > diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb > index 915e619..9dd4658 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb > +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb > @@ -10,9 +10,10 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=e647752e045a8c45b6f583771bd561ef \ > > DEPENDS = "liburcu" > > -PR = "r2" > +PR = "r3" > > SRC_URI = "http://lttng.org/files/ust/releases/ust-${PV}.tar.gz" > +SRC_URI_append_powerpc64 = " file://fix-powerpc64.patch" Does this really need to be conditional on powerppc64? Looks like it can be applied unconditionally... Cheers, Richard
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 23:21 -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock <msm@freescale.com> >> --- >> meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch | 17 +++++++++++++++++ >> meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb | 3 ++- >> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch >> >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..d347979 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch >> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate configuration > > Is this really inappropriate for upstream? It looks reasonable to me... Seems reasonable. What is the policy on this? Can I mark it "this should be upstreamed" or must I mark it "this was sent upstream" and then upstream the change? > >> + >> +Add bit to detect if we are running on powerpc64 and treat it the >> +same as ppc64 >> + >> +Index: ust-0.15/configure.ac >> +=================================================================== >> +--- ust-0.15.orig/configure.ac >> ++++ ust-0.15/configure.ac >> +@@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ changequote([,])dnl >> + x86_64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-x86-64" ;; >> + powerpc) LIBFORMAT="elf32-powerpc" ;; >> + ppc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; >> ++ powerpc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; >> + s390) LIBFORMAT="elf32-s390" ;; >> + s390x) LIBFORMAT="elf64-s390" ;; >> + armv5) LIBFORMAT="elf32-littlearm"; NO_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=1 ;; >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb >> index 915e619..9dd4658 100644 >> --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb >> +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb >> @@ -10,9 +10,10 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=e647752e045a8c45b6f583771bd561ef \ >> >> DEPENDS = "liburcu" >> >> -PR = "r2" >> +PR = "r3" >> >> SRC_URI = "http://lttng.org/files/ust/releases/ust-${PV}.tar.gz" >> +SRC_URI_append_powerpc64 = " file://fix-powerpc64.patch" > > Does this really need to be conditional on powerppc64? Looks like it can > be applied unconditionally... True, was trying to minimally effect other stuff. But I take it by the comment you prefer this be done away with. -M
On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 18:21 +0000, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Richard Purdie > <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 23:21 -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock <msm@freescale.com> > >> --- > >> meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > >> meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb | 3 ++- > >> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > >> create mode 100644 meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch > >> > >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 0000000..d347979 > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch > >> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate configuration > > > > Is this really inappropriate for upstream? It looks reasonable to me... > > Seems reasonable. What is the policy on this? Can I mark it "this > should be upstreamed" or must I mark it "this was sent upstream" and > then upstream the change? There is some marking for "should be upstreamed"/upstreamable. > >> +Add bit to detect if we are running on powerpc64 and treat it the > >> +same as ppc64 > >> + > >> +Index: ust-0.15/configure.ac > >> +=================================================================== > >> +--- ust-0.15.orig/configure.ac > >> ++++ ust-0.15/configure.ac > >> +@@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ changequote([,])dnl > >> + x86_64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-x86-64" ;; > >> + powerpc) LIBFORMAT="elf32-powerpc" ;; > >> + ppc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; > >> ++ powerpc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; > >> + s390) LIBFORMAT="elf32-s390" ;; > >> + s390x) LIBFORMAT="elf64-s390" ;; > >> + armv5) LIBFORMAT="elf32-littlearm"; NO_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=1 ;; > >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb > >> index 915e619..9dd4658 100644 > >> --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb > >> +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb > >> @@ -10,9 +10,10 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=e647752e045a8c45b6f583771bd561ef \ > >> > >> DEPENDS = "liburcu" > >> > >> -PR = "r2" > >> +PR = "r3" > >> > >> SRC_URI = "http://lttng.org/files/ust/releases/ust-${PV}.tar.gz" > >> +SRC_URI_append_powerpc64 = " file://fix-powerpc64.patch" > > > > Does this really need to be conditional on powerppc64? Looks like it can > > be applied unconditionally... > > True, was trying to minimally effect other stuff. But I take it by the > comment you prefer this be done away with. Sometimes minimally affecting other code is good. In this its obviously not going to break anything else so it can be universal. The risk of minimal application is fewer people testing it, e.g. when versions get upgraded. Cheers, Richard
On 09/29/2011 11:46 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 18:21 +0000, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Richard Purdie >> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >>> On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 23:21 -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote: >>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock<msm@freescale.com> >>>> --- >>>> meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch | 17 +++++++++++++++++ >>>> meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb | 3 ++- >>>> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch >>>> >>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000..d347979 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ >>>> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate configuration >>> >>> Is this really inappropriate for upstream? It looks reasonable to me... >> >> Seems reasonable. What is the policy on this? Can I mark it "this >> should be upstreamed" or must I mark it "this was sent upstream" and >> then upstream the change? > > There is some marking for "should be upstreamed"/upstreamable. > The marking would be "Pending", this indicates that it should be attempted, if it gets up streamed then marked Accepted with a pointer to the potential upstream version or ref. Thanks Sau! >>>> +Add bit to detect if we are running on powerpc64 and treat it the >>>> +same as ppc64 >>>> + >>>> +Index: ust-0.15/configure.ac >>>> +=================================================================== >>>> +--- ust-0.15.orig/configure.ac >>>> ++++ ust-0.15/configure.ac >>>> +@@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ changequote([,])dnl >>>> + x86_64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-x86-64" ;; >>>> + powerpc) LIBFORMAT="elf32-powerpc" ;; >>>> + ppc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; >>>> ++ powerpc64) LIBFORMAT="elf64-powerpc" ;; >>>> + s390) LIBFORMAT="elf32-s390" ;; >>>> + s390x) LIBFORMAT="elf64-s390" ;; >>>> + armv5) LIBFORMAT="elf32-littlearm"; NO_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=1 ;; >>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb >>>> index 915e619..9dd4658 100644 >>>> --- a/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb >>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb >>>> @@ -10,9 +10,10 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=e647752e045a8c45b6f583771bd561ef \ >>>> >>>> DEPENDS = "liburcu" >>>> >>>> -PR = "r2" >>>> +PR = "r3" >>>> >>>> SRC_URI = "http://lttng.org/files/ust/releases/ust-${PV}.tar.gz" >>>> +SRC_URI_append_powerpc64 = " file://fix-powerpc64.patch" >>> >>> Does this really need to be conditional on powerppc64? Looks like it can >>> be applied unconditionally... >> >> True, was trying to minimally effect other stuff. But I take it by the >> comment you prefer this be done away with. > > Sometimes minimally affecting other code is good. In this its obviously > not going to break anything else so it can be universal. The risk of > minimal application is fewer people testing it, e.g. when versions get > upgraded. > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Saul Wold <saul.wold@intel.com> wrote: >> There is some marking for "should be upstreamed"/upstreamable. >> > The marking would be "Pending", this indicates that it should be attempted, > if it gets up streamed then marked Accepted with a pointer to the potential > upstream version or ref. Thanks, the next version was changed to Submitted as I sent a patch upstream. -M
Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock <msm@freescale.com> --- meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch | 17 +++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/lttng-ust_0.15.bb | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-kernel/lttng/fix-powerpc64.patch