Re: [PATCH] meta: Remove overrides from kernel filename selection

[Anton Mikanovich <amikan@ilbers.de>]

08.06.2026 09:26, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 28.05.26 16:20, 'MOESSBAUER, Felix' via isar-users wrote:
>> On Thu, 2026-05-28 at 16:56 +0300, Anton Mikanovich wrote:
>>> Because of the override processing logic values set by overrides can be
>>> changed only by overrides. It makes redifinition of KERNEL_FILE value
>>> made by simple assignment be ignored, which was already broken for the
>>> rpi-arm64-v8 machine.
>>>
>>> Rebuild selection logic to be done in bitbake.conf without overrides.
>>> Keep KERNEL_FILE redifinition for the rpi targets as an example of its
>>> usage for the downstreams.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Anton Mikanovich <amikan@ilbers.de>
>>> Signed-off-by: Felix Moessbauer <felix.moessbauer@siemens.com>
>>> ---
>>>   meta/classes-recipe/linux-kernel.bbclass | 3 ---
>>>   meta/conf/bitbake.conf                   | 5 +----
>>>   2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/meta/classes-recipe/linux-kernel.bbclass b/meta/classes-recipe/linux-kernel.bbclass
>>> index 55ea6d63..e4ae356d 100644
>>> --- a/meta/classes-recipe/linux-kernel.bbclass
>>> +++ b/meta/classes-recipe/linux-kernel.bbclass
>>> @@ -211,9 +211,6 @@ def get_kernel_arch(d):
>>>   
>>>   KERNEL_ARCH ??= "${@get_kernel_arch(d)}"
>>>   
>>> -# set KERNEL_FILE without depending on package arch used in bitbake.conf
>>> -KERNEL_FILE:forcevariable = "${@ 'vmlinux' if d.getVar('KERNEL_ARCH') in ['mipsel', 'riscv', 'arm64'] else 'vmlinuz'}"
>> Shall we remove the forcevariable override as well? At least in isar
>> this was the last remaining user.
>>
> forcevariable is a generic OE concept that we should continue to
> support. Our downstream users may expect it to work as before.
>
> But this removal above likely reintroduces the bug it fixed in
> fc99297b40eb. Did you actually check against that case? Sorry, seen this
> too late, but reading the git history is what I would have expected. And
> if you did, you must refer to it, explaining why a revert is fine.
I've tried to build native kernels and it looks like everything is fine.
Unfortunately fc99297 do not mention any real targets and don't have a test
case, so I can't be 100% sure it isn't broken.
>
> So, this should have likely NOT be merged...
>
> Jan
>
>>> -
>>>   KERNEL_CONFIG_FRAGMENTS ?= ""
>>>   
>>>   def config_fragments(d):
>>> diff --git a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf
>>> index 08c525d9..6db10eb3 100644
>>> --- a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf
>>> +++ b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf
>>> @@ -65,10 +65,7 @@ SCHROOT_HOST_DIR = "${DEPLOY_DIR}/schroot-host/${HOST_DISTRO}-${HOST_ARCH}_${DIS
>>>   SCHROOT_TARGET_DIR = "${DEPLOY_DIR}/schroot-target/${DISTRO}-${DISTRO_ARCH}"
>>>   SDKCHROOT_DIR = "${DEPLOY_DIR_SDKCHROOT}/${BPN}-${DISTRO}-${MACHINE}"
>>>   CACHE = "${TMPDIR}/cache"
>>> -KERNEL_FILE ?= "vmlinuz"
>>> -KERNEL_FILE:mipsel ?= "vmlinux"
>>> -KERNEL_FILE:riscv64 ?= "vmlinux"
>>> -KERNEL_FILE:arm64 ?= "vmlinux"
>>> +KERNEL_FILE ?= "${@ 'vmlinux' if d.getVar('DISTRO_ARCH') in ['mipsel', 'riscv64', 'arm64'] else 'vmlinuz'}"
>> Thanks, that's how I envisioned it.
>>
>> Felix
>>
>>>   
>>>   MACHINEOVERRIDES ?= "${MACHINE}"
>>>   DISTROOVERRIDES ?= "${DISTRO}"
>>> -- 
>>> 2.34.1
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "isar-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to isar-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/isar-users/f598b607-adea-4b4c-ad4f-3697b10d11c6%40ilbers.de.