On 19 December 2017 at 21:20, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:19:09PM -0800, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:11:48PM -0800, Saul Wold wrote:
> > >> We have seen more failures, but have not been able to directly
> reproduce
> > >> it maybe svaing the rootfs and it contains some content that is
> tripping
> > >> up the e2fsprogs mkfs.ext4 populate_rootfs() function
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Saul Wold <s...@linux.intel.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> meta/classes/image_types.bbclass | 7 ++++++-
> > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
> b/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
> > >> index 9188bed4197..6b4f39ed274 100644
> > >> --- a/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
> > >> +++ b/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
> > >> @@ -86,9 +86,14 @@ oe_mkext234fs () {
> > >> bbdebug 1 Executing "dd if=/dev/zero of=${IMGDEPLOYDIR}/${IMAGE_
> NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX}.$fstype seek=$ROOTFS_SIZE count=$COUNT bs=1024"
> > >> dd if=/dev/zero of=${IMGDEPLOYDIR}/${IMAGE_
> NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX}.$fstype seek=$ROOTFS_SIZE count=$COUNT bs=1024
> > >> bbdebug 1 "Actual Rootfs size: `du -s ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}`"
> > >> - bbdebug 1 "Actual Partion size: `ls -s
> ${IMGDEPLOYDIR}/${IMAGE_NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX}.$fstype`"
> > >> + bbdebug 1 "Actual Partion size: `ls -l
> ${IMGDEPLOYDIR}/${IMAGE_NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX}.$fstype`"
> > >> bbdebug 1 Executing "mkfs.$fstype -F $extra_imagecmd
> ${IMGDEPLOYDIR}/${IMAGE_NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX}.$fstype -d
> ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}"
> > >> mkfs.$fstype -F $extra_imagecmd
> > >> ${IMGDEPLOYDIR}/${IMAGE_NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX}.$fstype
> -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}
> > >> + if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
> > >> + tmp_saved_rootfs=`mktemp -d -p /tmp saved_rootfs.XXXXX`
> > >> + cp -r ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} $tmp_saved_rootfs
> > >> + fi
> > >
> > > Wouldn't it be better to just fail on error here, rather than dump
> stuff
> > > to /tmp ?
> >
> > It already does fail with an error. Saving the state is temporary
> > additional debug to help understand why.
> >
> > https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12304
>
> So the problem is with the autobuilder where everything else gets blown
> away. That's fine, this is an autobuilder specific work-around, not a
> general purpose patch and shouldn't be in mainline, would be my point.
>
I suspect this will just hang in master-next and never merge into master.
Ross
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
