|
Re: [meta-rockchip][PATCH v2 2/2] rockchip-wic.inc: dont let wic edit fstab by default
Markus Volk
Am 24.09.21 um 15:10 schrieb Trevor
Woerner:
Thanks for the patch and the SoB line. I'm going to apply this patch, but I'm going to amend the commit message to capture some of the conversation we've had. There's a chance we'll want to know "why" at some point in the future ;-) Thanks for applying :) It would be cool if wic had something like an 'exclude-from-fstab-update" option. That would make the 'fstab-update' much more useful. |
|
|
|
Re: Cross-compiling or compiling on target VM?
On 9/24/21 2:06 AM, arnaud.bienner@... wrote:
Hi,there are different possibilities you have with all great tooling you get with yocto project, I think you have made a good choice. inherently Yocto project is a cross compiling infrastructure so lot of commonly used workflows will be around cross-compiling, however you can also leverage it in ways you described, where you build a development VM using yocto project itself which includes all the tools your developers would need and use that as build env + devtest env, see core-image-sato-sdk. However, this will be more of less a static env, which means devs wont be able to install packages like they might be doing with debian VM, you will have to either rebuild the VM or publish own feeds, but if you expect this to be static env then this might turn out to be ok. Advantage is that you will use same tools that your final target will use and you have ease of native development and folks not familiar with yocto can be effective as well. However this is not a common workflow that yocto project users might be using, so community support might be scarce. Other option could be that you do cross builds on your debian VM and use qemux86-64 as target and run your tests using ptest framework so you will be running your target VM in qemu on top of your build running debian which is running on windows/MacOS or Linux baremetal. There might be some quirks to use qemu in VM but I think it should work out well. This also means that in future when you target real hardware ( I assume thats what you want eventually ) then not much changes, you add another MACHINE and workflow remains pretty much same. But this would require your devs to learn a bit of yocto-fu and cross-complation workflows. In advance, thanks a lot for your help. |
|
|
|
[PATCH] yocto-bsp/5.13: drop recipes
Bruce Ashfield
From: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...>
5.13 has been removed from core, and we've moved the default support to 5.14, so we can drop our bbappend. Signed-off-by: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...> --- .../linux/linux-yocto_5.13.bbappend | 23 ------------------- 1 file changed, 23 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 meta-yocto-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.13.bbappend diff --git a/meta-yocto-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.13.bbappend b/meta-yocto-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.13.bbappend deleted file mode 100644 index daf5fd2cd6..0000000000 --- a/meta-yocto-bsp/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto_5.13.bbappend +++ /dev/null @@ -1,23 +0,0 @@ -KBRANCH:genericx86 = "v5.13/standard/base" -KBRANCH:genericx86-64 = "v5.13/standard/base" -KBRANCH:edgerouter = "v5.13/standard/edgerouter" -KBRANCH:beaglebone-yocto = "v5.13/standard/beaglebone" - -KMACHINE:genericx86 ?= "common-pc" -KMACHINE:genericx86-64 ?= "common-pc-64" -KMACHINE:beaglebone-yocto ?= "beaglebone" - -SRCREV_machine:genericx86 ?= "7280c93f5599946db3add473eeb05b34c364938d" -SRCREV_machine:genericx86-64 ?= "7280c93f5599946db3add473eeb05b34c364938d" -SRCREV_machine:edgerouter ?= "a832a0390e96c4f014d7b2bf9f161ac9477140f7" -SRCREV_machine:beaglebone-yocto ?= "dbdc921374c057a75b2df92302124994e241ca51" - -COMPATIBLE_MACHINE:genericx86 = "genericx86" -COMPATIBLE_MACHINE:genericx86-64 = "genericx86-64" -COMPATIBLE_MACHINE:edgerouter = "edgerouter" -COMPATIBLE_MACHINE:beaglebone-yocto = "beaglebone-yocto" - -LINUX_VERSION:genericx86 = "5.13.15" -LINUX_VERSION:genericx86-64 = "5.13.15" -LINUX_VERSION:edgerouter = "5.13.15" -LINUX_VERSION:beaglebone-yocto = "5.13.15" -- 2.19.1 |
|
|
|
Re: #yocto -third party licensimg
#yocto
Hi Steven,
Please see my comments inline On 24/09/2021 14:10, Monsees, Steven C (US) via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: The one solution I found says : Add *LICENSE_PATH += "${LAYERDIR}/custom-licenses"* under conf/layer.conf, *this does not resolve this warning*.I am a bit confused, but can try to show you what I typically do. In my custom meta-my-layer I add to layer.conf: #--> LICENSE_PATH += " ${LAYERDIR}/custom-licenses" CUSTOM_COMMON_LICENSE_DIR := '${@os.path.normpath("${LAYERDIR}/custom-licenses")}' BB_HASHBASE_WHITELIST_append = " CUSTOM_COMMON_LICENSE_DIR" #<-- underneath the custom-licenses dir in this meta-my-layer I put the custom "hello-license". *Can you tell me the proper way to add a custom license to a recipe in yocto ?*Once you did something like mentioned above you can add the license to the recipe you use to build the funny component of your supplier. example_0.1.bb: LICENSE = "hello-license" LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${CUSTOM_COMMON_LICENSE_DIR}/hello-license;beginline=5;endline=12;md5=36e6988a930e054886e6af19372edb07" If you want to get fancy, since it does not seem to be an open source license, you can mark it also as: LICENSE_FLAGS = "commercial" in the recipe but then you need to whitelist e.g. in your local.conf to be able to bitbake it: # whitelist example recipe, which is under a commercial license LICENSE_FLAGS_WHITELIST = "commercial_example" Thanks,Hope this helps, Regards, Robert |
|
|
|
Re: [meta-rockchip][PATCH v2 2/2] rockchip-wic.inc: dont let wic edit fstab by default
Trevor Woerner
On Thu 2021-09-23 @ 11:17:59 PM, Markus Volk wrote:
Signed-off-by: MarkusVolk <f_l_k@...>Thanks for the patch and the SoB line. I'm going to apply this patch, but I'm going to amend the commit message to capture some of the conversation we've had. There's a chance we'll want to know "why" at some point in the future ;-) |
|
|
|
Re: [meta-rockchip][PATCH] use uuid instead of hard-coding root device
Trevor Woerner
On Thu 2021-09-23 @ 09:46:40 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
are you both using systemd or sysvinitAh, good catch. I'm using sysvinit. |
|
|
|
#yocto -third party licensimg
#yocto
Monsees, Steven C (US)
 Hello:  I am running zeus 3.0.4…  A vendor has supplied us with a generic license.txt file, which we were able to add to the acexpci recipe we use to build in their package. The license provided to us by the vendor is not part of the generic licenses list that yocto recognizes.  We get a warning though which says:  WARNING: aiox-defaultfs-1.0-r0 do_rootfs: The license listed DataDeviceCorporation was not in the licenses collected for recipe acexpci  Though the warning occurs, I can see the license.txt being saved inside the rootfs on and is saved under tmp/deploy/licenses/acexpci. I’ve been trying to get rid of this warning when the image builds, but I can’t seem to find anything in the manuals or online.  The one solution I found says : Add LICENSE_PATH += "${LAYERDIR}/custom-licenses" under conf/layer.conf, this does not resolve this warning.  This is a new item being added to our Yocto build. The Data Direct vendor does not submit their code to Yocto because they sell thier code. We are adding code to Yocto that has a private license and we are attempting to have Yocto accept the license, is this proper way to handle this ?  Can you tell me the proper way to add a custom license to a recipe in yocto ?  Thanks, Steve |
|
|
|
Re: [meta-rockchip][PATCH] use uuid instead of hard-coding root device
Markus Volk
Am 24.09.21 um 06:46 schrieb Khem Raj:
are you both using systemd or sysvinit I am using systemd |
|
|
|
Re: Cross-compiling or compiling on target VM?
Alexander Kanavin
Yocto has built-in qemu targets for this purpose, and associated infrastructure to start qemu VMs and run tests in them. But to make it practical, these qemu images need to be started on a baremetal Linux machine. So I'd suggest you start by giving all your developers Linux laptops. Alex On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 11:06, <arnaud.bienner@...> wrote: Hi, |
|
|
|
[meta-selinux][PATCH] libsepol: Security fix for CVE-2021-36086
Yi Zhao
CVE-2021-36086:
The CIL compiler in SELinux 3.2 has a use-after-free in cil_reset_classpermission (called from cil_reset_classperms_set and cil_reset_classperms_list). Reference: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-36086 Patch from: https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux/commit/c49a8ea09501ad66e799ea41b8154b6770fec2c8 Signed-off-by: Yi Zhao <yi.zhao@...> --- .../selinux/libsepol/CVE-2021-36086.patch | 46 +++++++++++++++++++ recipes-security/selinux/libsepol_3.2.bb | 3 +- 2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 recipes-security/selinux/libsepol/CVE-2021-36086.patch diff --git a/recipes-security/selinux/libsepol/CVE-2021-36086.patch b/recipes-security/selinux/libsepol/CVE-2021-36086.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7a2d616 --- /dev/null +++ b/recipes-security/selinux/libsepol/CVE-2021-36086.patch @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ +From 49f9aa2a460fc95f04c99b44f4dd0d22e2f0e5ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: James Carter <jwcart2@...> +Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 13:32:06 -0400 +Subject: [PATCH] libsepol/cil: cil_reset_classperms_set() should not reset + classpermission + +In struct cil_classperms_set, the set field is a pointer to a +struct cil_classpermission which is looked up in the symbol table. +Since the cil_classperms_set does not create the cil_classpermission, +it should not reset it. + +Set the set field to NULL instead of resetting the classpermission +that it points to. + +Signed-off-by: James Carter <jwcart2@...> + +Upstream-Status: Backport +[https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux/commit/c49a8ea09501ad66e799ea41b8154b6770fec2c8] + +CVE: CVE-2021-36086 + +Signed-off-by: Yi Zhao <yi.zhao@...> +--- + cil/src/cil_reset_ast.c | 6 +++++- + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) + +diff --git a/cil/src/cil_reset_ast.c b/cil/src/cil_reset_ast.c +index 89f91e5..1d9ca70 100644 +--- a/cil/src/cil_reset_ast.c ++++ b/cil/src/cil_reset_ast.c +@@ -59,7 +59,11 @@ static void cil_reset_classpermission(struct cil_classpermission *cp) + + static void cil_reset_classperms_set(struct cil_classperms_set *cp_set) + { +- cil_reset_classpermission(cp_set->set); ++ if (cp_set == NULL) { ++ return; ++ } ++ ++ cp_set->set = NULL; + } + + static inline void cil_reset_classperms_list(struct cil_list *cp_list) +-- +2.17.1 + diff --git a/recipes-security/selinux/libsepol_3.2.bb b/recipes-security/selinux/libsepol_3.2.bb index ef5de1e..192f1b3 100644 --- a/recipes-security/selinux/libsepol_3.2.bb +++ b/recipes-security/selinux/libsepol_3.2.bb @@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://${S}/COPYING;md5=a6f89e2100d9b6cdffcea4f398e37343" require selinux_common.inc SRC_URI += "file://CVE-2021-36084.patch \ - file://CVE-2021-36085.patch " + file://CVE-2021-36085.patch \ + file://CVE-2021-36086.patch " inherit lib_package -- 2.25.1 |
|
|
|
Cross-compiling or compiling on target VM?
arnaud.bienner@...
Hi,
We are starting a new project using Yocto to build a custom Linux image which matches our needs. We are new to Yocto and still trying to figure out the best way to work with it. Especially, if it is best to cross-compile or to build on a VM running an image of the target. Some background: Our target system is x86_64, and we are all working on x86_64 computers obviously. For now, we don't have yet a physical target system so we are running the image generated by Yocto in VirtualBox or VMWare. For practical reasons, since not all developers use the same OS (Windows, macOS) we decided to do all development work on Linux VM (Debian distribution) so everyone has the same system. For now, we are cross-compiling applications using Yocto SDK in that Debian VM, copying it to the Yocto VM to run it. Even though copying/deploying and running them could be somehow automated, since we are developing on a Linux VM anyway, I thought it could be best to build a Yocto image (maybe as an additional "dev" image based on the existing one) which contains all tools we need (gcc, cmake, etc.). This way, we could execute the binaries (in particular the unit tests) locally. For some of our unit tests in particular that we run at build time, it sounds easier to run them locally, compared to deploying them and running them remotely. Any thoughts about this? In advance, thanks a lot for your help. Best regards, Arnaud |
|
|
|
Re: Using bitbake with external SDK
#sdk
#zeus
#toolchain
Hello Enrico,
an eSDK would be enough to do everything, however I would demand the entire development system if I were to start a project, but that is my opinion. I don't know well Node-RED but using devtool add you should be able to create or manage a recipe for any Node application. Happy hacking! -- Marco Cavallini | KOAN sas Bergamo - Italia embedded software engineering https://KoanSoftware.com |
|
|
|
Re: Using bitbake with external SDK
#sdk
#zeus
#toolchain
enrico.buffoli1994@...
Hello Marco,
In your opinion isn't enough to ask for eSDK? for instance if i want to add Node-RED, it would be difficult to build with devtool? because i've seen that it doesn't resolve dependencies automatically. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Re: Using bitbake with external SDK
#sdk
#zeus
#toolchain
enrico.buffoli1994@...
With the eSDK i've to use devtool right?
|
|
|
|
Re: Using bitbake with external SDK
#sdk
#zeus
#toolchain
Hello Enrico,
usually nowadays every honest hardware manufacturer provides all the sources of the BSP and the development system to their customers. Try asking your supplier for them. -- Marco Cavallini | KOAN sas Bergamo - Italia embedded software engineering https://KoanSoftware.com |
|
|
|
[meta-zephyr][PATCH 1/2] zephyr-qemuboot: fix parse build failure
Naveen Saini
As OE-core explicitly have added depends for qemu-helper addto_recipe_sysroot task, which
breaks zephyr-qemuboot implementation of adding build dependencies http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=282d596b8cc81d650b6d20c6131fdc236bad2c20 ERROR: Error for meta-zephyr/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-helloworld.bb: do_bootconf_write[depends], dependency qemu-helper-native:do_addto_recipe_sysroot:do_addto_recipe_sysroot in ' qemu-helper-native:do_addto_recipe_sysroot:do_addto_recipe_sysroot qemu-helper-native:do_addto_recipe_sysroot:do_populate_sysroot' does not contain exactly one ':' character. Task 'depends' should be specified in the form 'packagename:task' ERROR: Command execution failed: Exited with 1 Signed-off-by: Naveen Saini <naveen.kumar.saini@...> --- classes/zephyr-qemuboot.bbclass | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/classes/zephyr-qemuboot.bbclass b/classes/zephyr-qemuboot.bbclass index c268e9e..b45e6f6 100644 --- a/classes/zephyr-qemuboot.bbclass +++ b/classes/zephyr-qemuboot.bbclass @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ python () { for dep in (d.getVar('EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS') or "").split(): # Make sure we only add it for qemu if 'qemu-helper-native' in dep: - deps += " %s:%s" % (dep, task) + deps += " qemu-helper-native:%s" % (task) return deps d.appendVarFlag('do_bootconf_write', 'depends', extraimage_getdepends('do_addto_recipe_sysroot')) d.appendVarFlag('do_bootconf_write', 'depends', extraimage_getdepends('do_populate_sysroot')) -- 2.17.1 |
|
|
|
[meta-zephyr][PATCH 2/2] zephyr-kernel: upgrade 2.6.0 -> 2.6.1
Naveen Saini
It has GCC-11 fixes.
https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/issues/35707 Commits included: 2d6322d74a demand_paging: eviction/nru: fix incorrect dirty bit return val 25771e6928 drivers: clock_control: stm32: enable PWR clock unconditionally 92e36185e8 [Backport v2.6-branch] Microchip: XEC GPIO driver interrupt enable part 2 68d33e3834 libc/minimal: locate the memory pool for malloc() to .bss 7f3abab9bf net: tcp: accept [FIN, PSH, ACK] in TCP_FIN_WAIT_2 state 533dcaf374 lib/os/cbprintf_nano.c: avoid sign extension on unsigned formats ea55ebfa74 tests: schedule_api: use stack array extern macro 95bb8841b8 tests: mem_protect: fix warning on uninitialized variable 1f8c53dfaf tests: kernel/common: avoid using compiler builtin popcount 7bb7454a00 kernel: use proper macro to declare extern interrupt stacks 25fd176014 kernel: add macros to allow declaring extern stack arrays e1cde092ac kernel: move Z_KERNEL_STACK_LEN higher in thread_stack.h 244049bd71 x86: type cast to uint8_t* for bit ops 5dae0c1bf0 kernel: ignore array bound warnings for generated syscall funcs 5666e4d525 cmake: force GCC to emit DWARF version 4 91a78866ca Bluetooth: Controller: Fix advertising after connections from same peer 0afddb2341 x86/cache: fix issues in arch dcache flush function 9bcf9b6a53 json: fix parsing first array-array element 2595cce714 cmake: oneApi: add oneApi support on windows. 18d314e750 cmake: oneApi: add oneApi support on windows c8755e0b46 (tag: v2.6.1-rc1) tests/benchmarks: add dynamic memory allocation measurement a4d35f0a3e doc: 2.6.1 release notes 7094aaee55 release: Bump release to 2.6.1-rc1 585c03a0b6 drivers/clock_control: stm32: Fix macro to get HCLK freq cacb0a4e59 Bluetooth: L2CAP: Fix missing net_buf_unref() 78ab750540 timer: hpet: convert register access to functions d9df404d47 timer: hpet: don't force TIMER_READS_ITS_FREQUENCY_AT_RUNTIME 8e80955511 timer: hpet: allow overriding MIN_DELAY 99dc33faaf timer: hpet: extract Counter Clock Period into a macro 02fbe652a5 logging: fs: fix leak of opened directories in check_log_file_exist() 80b406d784 x86: acpi: limit search on where EBDA can be Signed-off-by: Naveen Saini <naveen.kumar.saini@...> --- ...ephyr-kernel-src-2.6.0.inc => zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.1.inc} | 4 ++-- recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src.inc | 2 +- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) rename recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/{zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.0.inc => zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.1.inc} (90%) diff --git a/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.0.inc b/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.1.inc similarity index 90% rename from recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.0.inc rename to recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.1.inc index 63665bf..109242e 100644 --- a/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.0.inc +++ b/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src-2.6.1.inc @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ SRCREV_FORMAT = "default_cmsis" -SRCREV_default = "837ab4a915f7802a6fb02a27e4b024e287ac93c2" +SRCREV_default = "2d6322d74aaac838ead46bfcba0db619cff4b534" SRCREV_cmsis = "c3bd2094f92d574377f7af2aec147ae181aa5f8e" SRCREV_nordic = "574493fe29c79140df4827ab5d4a23df79d03681" SRCREV_stm32 = "f8ff8d25aa0a9e65948040c7b47ec67f3fa300df" @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ SRCREV_tinycrypt = "3e9a49d2672ec01435ffbf0d788db6d95ef28de0" SRCREV_mbedtls = "5765cb7f75a9973ae9232d438e361a9d7bbc49e7" ZEPHYR_BRANCH = "v2.6-branch" -PV = "2.6.0+git${SRCPV}" +PV = "2.6.1+git${SRCPV}" SRC_URI:append = " file://0001-cmake-add-yocto-toolchain.patch \ file://0001-x86-fix-efi-binary-generation-issue-in-cross-compila.patch \ diff --git a/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src.inc b/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src.inc index abe755d..458ff1e 100644 --- a/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src.inc +++ b/recipes-kernel/zephyr-kernel/zephyr-kernel-src.inc @@ -22,5 +22,5 @@ SRC_URI = "\ S = "${WORKDIR}/git" # Default to a stable version -PREFERRED_VERSION_zephyr-kernel ??= "2.6.0" +PREFERRED_VERSION_zephyr-kernel ??= "2.6.1" include zephyr-kernel-src-${PREFERRED_VERSION_zephyr-kernel}.inc -- 2.17.1 |
|
|
|
Re: "stack smashing detected" when building aarch64 kernel
its hard to say what might be going on. Perhaps enable builds with V=1
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
so you can see if its always failing to compile at same file. or atleast you can get one file where it fails then you can use preprocessed file to build it in a loop and see if you can get it to fail more. On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 8:16 AM Rasmus Villemoes via lists.yoctoproject.org <rasmus.villemoes=prevas.dk@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: gcov support for target in Yocto
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:53 AM Lijun Chen <lijchen@...> wrote:
IMAGE_INSTALL += "gcov gcov-symlinks"
|
|
|
|
Re: [meta-rockchip][PATCH] use uuid instead of hard-coding root device
are you both using systemd or sysvinit
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 3:26 PM Markus Volk <f_l_k@...> wrote:
|
|
|