[meta-xilinx] microblazev8 tune problems

Mills, William wmills at ti.com
Tue May 2 10:19:40 PDT 2017


Actually, I rechecked my original machine.  (Below I used a 2nd machine with a cleaner environment.)

There are 13 new patches on meta-xilink master that were not there when I cloned for the first machine several days ago.
I pulled again and now see your microblaze tune rework (commit dated 2017-01-14)
Did you just push these to github master a couple of days ago or is something funny going on in my clones?


-----Original Message-----
From: Mills, William 
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 1:00 PM
To: Mills, William; Nathan Rossi
Cc: meta-xilinx at yoctoproject.org
Subject: RE: [meta-xilinx] microblazev8 tune problems

>> On 04/29/2017 10:22 AM, Nathan Rossi wrote:
>> You mean you couldn't trigger it? or it was causing errors? 

Yesterday I wrote:
>bitbake fails during the conf/recipe parsing phase.
> I think even before it actually gets to recipes.
> I did see in the in-progress YP 2.3 Docs that the old bb.data.getVar()
> syntax was deleted.  This python fragment uses that so I would not
> expect it to work in master branch.
> However, this does not explain why I could not get it to work when I was
> on morty or krogoth.  I think I need to retry that.
> I am not at the machine I was using for this.  I will post a detailed
> error message when I get back to that machine.

Sorry, this must have just been me messing up.  
Retesting with oe-core & meta-xilinx on morty branch and bitbake at v3.2 it works fine.
It also works fine with all 3 at master.

Somehow I must have been using morty branch of meta-xilinx with master bitbake etc.
The microblaze conf in master is totally reworked.
The anon python fragment is still present and updated for the new syntax.
What's more the comment has been updated to reflect exactly what the code does.

Again, sorry for the confusion.


More information about the meta-xilinx mailing list