[PATCH] kernel.spec: adding --with firmware & --without vdso_install build options

[Steve Dickson]

Now that devel kernels rpms require the kernel-firmware rpm, it makes
sense to me that one should be able to build both of them at the 
same time. So this patch adds the "--with firmware" build option
which will allow kernel-firmware rpms to built with kernel rpms.

This patch also adds the "--without vdso_install" build option
which stop the VDSO binaries from being installed. This cuts
down the overall build time especially when you build over NFS
like I do..

Signed-Off-By: Steve Dickson

diff -up SPECS/kernel.spec.orig SPECS/kernel.spec
--- SPECS/kernel.spec.orig	2008-07-29 09:07:48.000000000 -0400
+++ SPECS/kernel.spec	2008-07-29 11:44:39.000000000 -0400
@@ -75,11 +75,13 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
 # kernel-headers
 %define with_headers   %{?_without_headers:   0} %{?!_without_headers:   1}
 # kernel-firmware
-%define with_firmware  %{?_without_firmware:  0} %{?!_without_firmware:  1}
+%define with_firmware  %{?_with_firmware:  1} %{?!_with_firmware:  0}
 # kernel-debuginfo
 %define with_debuginfo %{?_without_debuginfo: 0} %{?!_without_debuginfo: 1}
 # kernel-bootwrapper (for creating zImages from kernel + initrd)
 %define with_bootwrapper %{?_without_bootwrapper: 0} %{?!_without_bootwrapper: 1}
+# Want to build a the vsdo directories installed
+%define with_vdso_install %{?_without_vdso_install: 0} %{?!_without_vdso_install: 1}

# don't build the kernel-doc package
 %define with_doc 0
@@ -188,8 +190,10 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel

%define all_x86 i386 i586 i686

+%if %{with_vdso_install}
 # These arches install vdso/ directories.
 %define vdso_arches %{all_x86} x86_64 ppc ppc64
+%endif

# Overrides for generic default options

@@ -217,7 +221,6 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
 # only package docs noarch
 %ifnarch noarch
 %define with_doc 0
-%define with_firmware 0
 %endif

# no need to build headers again for these arches,
@@ -231,6 +234,7 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
 %define with_up 0
 %define with_headers 0
 %define all_arch_configs kernel-%{version}-*.config
+%define with_firmware 1
 %endif

# bootwrapper is only on ppc

[Chuck Ebbert]

Steve Dickson wrote:
> Now that devel kernels rpms require the kernel-firmware rpm, it makes
> sense to me that one should be able to build both of them at the 
> same time. So this patch adds the "--with firmware" build option
> which will allow kernel-firmware rpms to built with kernel rpms.
>
> This patch also adds the "--without vdso_install" build option
> which stop the VDSO binaries from being installed. This cuts
> down the overall build time especially when you build over NFS
> like I do..
>
> Signed-Off-By: Steve Dickson

With one small change we can still support --without firmware. That way
the default behavior can be overridden in either case. See below...
> diff -up SPECS/kernel.spec.orig SPECS/kernel.spec
> --- SPECS/kernel.spec.orig	2008-07-29 09:07:48.000000000 -0400
> +++ SPECS/kernel.spec	2008-07-29 11:44:39.000000000 -0400
> @@ -75,11 +75,13 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
>  # kernel-headers
>  %define with_headers   %{?_without_headers:   0} %{?!_without_headers:   1}
>  # kernel-firmware
> -%define with_firmware  %{?_without_firmware:  0} %{?!_without_firmware:  1}
> +%define with_firmware  %{?_with_firmware:  1} %{?!_with_firmware:  0}
>  # kernel-debuginfo
>  %define with_debuginfo %{?_without_debuginfo: 0} %{?!_without_debuginfo: 1}
>  # kernel-bootwrapper (for creating zImages from kernel + initrd)
>  %define with_bootwrapper %{?_without_bootwrapper: 0} %{?!_without_bootwrapper: 1}
> +# Want to build a the vsdo directories installed
> +%define with_vdso_install %{?_without_vdso_install: 0} %{?!_without_vdso_install: 1}
>
> # don't build the kernel-doc package
>  %define with_doc 0
> @@ -188,8 +190,10 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
>
> %define all_x86 i386 i586 i686
>
> +%if %{with_vdso_install}
>  # These arches install vdso/ directories.
>  %define vdso_arches %{all_x86} x86_64 ppc ppc64
> +%endif
>
> # Overrides for generic default options
>
> @@ -217,7 +221,6 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
>  # only package docs noarch
>  %ifnarch noarch
>  %define with_doc 0
> -%define with_firmware 0
>  %endif
>
> # no need to build headers again for these arches,
> @@ -231,6 +234,7 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel
>  %define with_up 0
>  %define with_headers 0
>  %define all_arch_configs kernel-%{version}-*.config
> +%define with_firmware 1

+%define with_firmware  %{?_without_firmware:  0} %{?!_without_firmware:  1}
> %endif
>
> # bootwrapper is only on ppc

[Steve Dickson]

Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> Steve Dickson wrote:
> > Now that devel kernels rpms require the kernel-firmware rpm, it makes
> > sense to me that one should be able to build both of them at the same
> > time. So this patch adds the "--with firmware" build option
> > which will allow kernel-firmware rpms to built with kernel rpms.
> >
> > This patch also adds the "--without vdso_install" build option
> > which stop the VDSO binaries from being installed. This cuts
> > down the overall build time especially when you build over NFS
> > like I do..
> > Signed-Off-By: Steve Dickson
>
> With one small change we can still support --without firmware. That way
> the default behavior can be overridden in either case. See below...

Sure.. that works... Is there an ETA for these two changes?

steved.

[Jarod Wilson]

On Tuesday 05 August 2008 09:24:10 Steve Dickson wrote:
> Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > Steve Dickson wrote:
> > > Now that devel kernels rpms require the kernel-firmware rpm, it makes
> > > sense to me that one should be able to build both of them at the same
> > > time. So this patch adds the "--with firmware" build option
> > > which will allow kernel-firmware rpms to built with kernel rpms.
> > >
> > > This patch also adds the "--without vdso_install" build option
> > > which stop the VDSO binaries from being installed. This cuts
> > > down the overall build time especially when you build over NFS
> > > like I do..
> > > Signed-Off-By: Steve Dickson
> >
> > With one small change we can still support --without firmware. That way
> > the default behavior can be overridden in either case. See below...
>
> Sure.. that works... Is there an ETA for these two changes?

I don't quite follow how the firmware change is supposed to work... The 
firmware is currently supposed to be a noarch package, and it gets built in 
the same pass as the kernel-docs sub-package, so it *shouldn't* be built in 
the same pass as the kernel. Is this flag to simply override that and build 
the firmware as an arch-specific package for simplified one-off builds?

[Kyle McMartin]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 11:01:17AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 August 2008 09:24:10 Steve Dickson wrote:
> > Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > > Steve Dickson wrote:
> > > > Now that devel kernels rpms require the kernel-firmware rpm, it makes
> > > > sense to me that one should be able to build both of them at the same
> > > > time. So this patch adds the "--with firmware" build option
> > > > which will allow kernel-firmware rpms to built with kernel rpms.
> > > >
> > > > This patch also adds the "--without vdso_install" build option
> > > > which stop the VDSO binaries from being installed. This cuts
> > > > down the overall build time especially when you build over NFS
> > > > like I do..
> > > > Signed-Off-By: Steve Dickson
> > >
> > > With one small change we can still support --without firmware. That way
> > > the default behavior can be overridden in either case. See below...
> >
> > Sure.. that works... Is there an ETA for these two changes?
>
> I don't quite follow how the firmware change is supposed to work... The 
> firmware is currently supposed to be a noarch package, and it gets built in 
> the same pass as the kernel-docs sub-package, so it *shouldn't* be built in 
> the same pass as the kernel. Is this flag to simply override that and build 
> the firmware as an arch-specific package for simplified one-off builds?

You bring up a pretty good point here Jarod, what happens with firmware
for arch-specific drivers? The Makefile rules will have to be written in
such a way that it gets built into the package despite the CONFIG_*
symbol being unset on the build arch.

r, Kyle

[Chuck Ebbert]

Kyle McMartin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 11:01:17AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 August 2008 09:24:10 Steve Dickson wrote:
> > > Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > > > Steve Dickson wrote:
> > > > > Now that devel kernels rpms require the kernel-firmware rpm, it makes
> > > > > sense to me that one should be able to build both of them at the same
> > > > > time. So this patch adds the "--with firmware" build option
> > > > > which will allow kernel-firmware rpms to built with kernel rpms.
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch also adds the "--without vdso_install" build option
> > > > > which stop the VDSO binaries from being installed. This cuts
> > > > > down the overall build time especially when you build over NFS
> > > > > like I do..
> > > > > Signed-Off-By: Steve Dickson
> > > >
> > > > With one small change we can still support --without firmware. That way
> > > > the default behavior can be overridden in either case. See below...
> > >
> > > Sure.. that works... Is there an ETA for these two changes?
> >
> > I don't quite follow how the firmware change is supposed to work... The 
> > firmware is currently supposed to be a noarch package, and it gets built in 
> > the same pass as the kernel-docs sub-package, so it *shouldn't* be built in 
> > the same pass as the kernel. Is this flag to simply override that and build 
> > the firmware as an arch-specific package for simplified one-off builds?
>
> You bring up a pretty good point here Jarod, what happens with firmware
> for arch-specific drivers? The Makefile rules will have to be written in
> such a way that it gets built into the package despite the CONFIG_*
> symbol being unset on the build arch.

That's what it does. It includes all firmware, even for drivers that don't get
built. Look in firmware/Makefile and you'll see it builds lists
named fw-shipped-y, fw-shipped-m and fw-shipped- then just merges them to
create fw-shipped-all  which it uses to build/install the firmware.

[Kyle McMartin]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 04:19:07PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> That's what it does. It includes all firmware, even for drivers that don't get
> built. Look in firmware/Makefile and you'll see it builds lists
> named fw-shipped-y, fw-shipped-m and fw-shipped- then just merges them to
> create fw-shipped-all  which it uses to build/install the firmware.

Does this cover the case of firmware declared in Makefiles in subdirs
that are obj-$(CONFIG_i) += subdir/?

If so, cool, but I can't be arsed to check.

cheers, kyle

[Chuck Ebbert]

Kyle McMartin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 04:19:07PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > That's what it does. It includes all firmware, even for drivers that don't get
> > built. Look in firmware/Makefile and you'll see it builds lists
> > named fw-shipped-y, fw-shipped-m and fw-shipped- then just merges them to
> > create fw-shipped-all  which it uses to build/install the firmware.
>
> Does this cover the case of firmware declared in Makefiles in subdirs
> that are obj-$(CONFIG_i) += subdir/?
>
> If so, cool, but I can't be arsed to check.

It only does its thing for stuff in firmware/

Every firmware file needs to be moved there; some are not and they
don't get into the package.

[Chuck Ebbert]

Steve Dickson wrote:
> Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > Steve Dickson wrote:
> > > Now that devel kernels rpms require the kernel-firmware rpm, it makes
> > > sense to me that one should be able to build both of them at the same
> > > time. So this patch adds the "--with firmware" build option
> > > which will allow kernel-firmware rpms to built with kernel rpms.
> > >
> > > This patch also adds the "--without vdso_install" build option
> > > which stop the VDSO binaries from being installed. This cuts
> > > down the overall build time especially when you build over NFS
> > > like I do..
> > > Signed-Off-By: Steve Dickson
> >
> > With one small change we can still support --without firmware. That way
> > the default behavior can be overridden in either case. See below...
>
> Sure.. that works... Is there an ETA for these two changes?

Applied.