kernel-4.15.0-0.rc3.git0.1.fc28 src rpm fails to compile because of
errors in ppc64p7 config file
by stan
I tried to compile this kernel from the src rpm on rawhide. I kept
getting the error that two config options for ppc64p7 were set to m,
and m wasn't a valid choice.
So, I generated the following patch,
diff --git a/configs/kernel-4.15.0-ppc64p7.config
b/configs/kernel-4.15.0-ppc64p7.config index 18f4b44..ca5b410 100644
--- a/configs/kernel-4.15.0-ppc64p7.config
+++ b/configs/kernel-4.15.0-ppc64p7.config
@@ -1704,7 +1704,7 @@ CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TIMERIOMEM=m
CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TPM=m
CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_VIRTIO=m
CONFIG_HW_RANDOM=y
-CONFIG_HWSPINLOCK=m
+CONFIG_HWSPINLOCK=y
CONFIG_HYSDN_CAPI=y
CONFIG_HYSDN=m
CONFIG_HZ=100
@@ -4447,7 +4447,7 @@ CONFIG_SND_DARLA24=m
# CONFIG_SND_DEBUG_VERBOSE is not set
CONFIG_SND_DEBUG=y
CONFIG_SND_DESIGNWARE_I2S=m
-CONFIG_SND_DESIGNWARE_PCM=m
+CONFIG_SND_DESIGNWARE_PCM=y
CONFIG_SND_DICE=m
CONFIG_SND_DMAENGINE_PCM=m
CONFIG_SND_DRIVERS=y
I don't know if y is a valid setting for a ppc for those options, but I
presume if m was desired, y would succeed. I don't really care about
ppc64p7 as I'm building for x86_64. I changed the spec file so that
this architecture won't be built in nobuildarches, and this error still
occurred.
Unfortunately, at the time that the kernel is patched, this config file
doesn't exist yet, and so the patch fails. I see a successful build in
koji; I'm not sure how that can be.
What is the best way to proceed from here?
Thanks.
6 years, 3 months
Updating config option layout and scripts
by Don Zickus
Hi Laura,
As per our conversation, here is my pull request for the config changes:
https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-dzickus.git rh_sync
As part of an effort to foster better cross collaboration with internal Red
Hat kernels, align the configs layout to match that kernel. This will allow
Red Hat engineers to provide easier guidance on how to set various config
options.
In addition, the scripts that process the config options will migrate to the
configs/ directory too. Future config workflows will stage all work in the
configs/ area.
A simple diff between the kernels will easily expose which config options
are different. Reading the comments in the file provides guidance to Fedora
to determine if that kernel should make a similar change or not. While the
RH kernel stays internal, requested changes will be posted publicly for
review with said reason.
Rename debugconfig -> configs/base-debug
Rename baseconfig -> configs/base-generic
Rename configs/base-generic/arm/arm64 -> configs/base-generic/arm/aarch64
You can browse the changes here:
https://pagure.io/fedora-kernel-dzickus/branch/rh_sync
Note: Laura asked me not post the patches as the diffstat for the 'git mv'
is obnoxiously large. Instead I am providing the changes on pagure.
Cheers,
Don
6 years, 3 months
HID_CP2112 is not set in the Fedora kernel config
by Christoph M.
Hi Fedora kernel team,
today I've received a CP2112 based USB-to-I2C adapter board
to interact with some I2C devices. I've chosen an adpater based
on that chip since it has a mainline Linux driver.
To my surprise the adapter was not working, because the
config file of the Fedora kernel has HID_CP2112 not set
(I've checked /boot/config-4.13.16-302.fc27.x86_64).
Recompiling a kernel is not an issue for me, but doing that
regularly might get a bit cumbersome at some point.
Therefore I'd like to ask if there is a specific reason why this
kernel config option is not enabled in the Fedora kernel and
what would be necessary to get this enabled by default?
Thanks,
Christoph
6 years, 3 months
Move /usr/include/cpuidle.h to kernel-tools-libs-devel from
kernel-headers
by Laura Abbott
While experimenting with some refactoring, I noticed that /usr/include/cpuidle.h
was being picked up by the glob for kernel-headers. This is kind of unusual
because /usr/include/cpufreq.h exists in kernel-tools-libs-devel yet both
come out of install from cpupower tools. This header really belongs in
kernel-tools-libs-devel for consistency and I'd like to move it. I don't
anticipate there being any problems but if anyone can think of an issue for
moving this header from kernel-headers to kernel-tools-libs-devel please
let me know. I don't plan on doing anything about this until next week at the
earliest (Thanksgiving here in the US).
Thanks,
Laura
6 years, 3 months