From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br (Otavio Salvador) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 21:07:37 -0200 Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH v7] u-boot: Add mkenvimage tool In-Reply-To: <8950e9f58055a8667d20ff83de1f8acd14b7f303.camel@synopsys.com> References: <20181122225820.2553-1-abrodkin@synopsys.com> <8950e9f58055a8667d20ff83de1f8acd14b7f303.camel@synopsys.com> List-ID: Message-ID: To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org Hello Alexey, On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 7:30 PM Alexey Brodkin wrote: > On Sat, 2018-11-24@06:57 -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Details/202185/ > > Looking at the target name "u-boot-tools-1_2018.11-r0 do_compile" > I think it might have something to do with bump of U-Boot to v2018.11 > and the error message in question was added in v2018.11-rc1, > see http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=a4958a71017fb142542f977c843c5fce769fc6ea > > The problem is we use "sandbox_defconfig" as a dummy defconfig > because otherwise (not configured) U-Boot's build-system won't > allow us to proceed and in its turn mentioned patch adds a check > for a target platform like "if defined(__x86_64__)" which > we essentially don't satisfy and so we fail. > > There're the following solutions: > 1. Revert mentioned patch > 2. Disable "CONFIG_EFI_LOADER" > > Reverting is not nice and not future-proof. > Disabling of "CONFIG_EFI_LOADER" might be done in a couple of ways > like: > 1. Patching sandbox_defconfig > 2. Filtering "CONFIG_EFI_LOADER" from "sandbox_defconfig" right before > execution of "make sandbox_defconfig" > > I think latter option is the simplest and cleanest. > > Should I send a patch for that? Let's add Tom (U-Boot upstream main maintainer) to this so he can comment. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi1-f193.google.com (mail-oi1-f193.google.com [209.85.167.193]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F766C0F4 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 23:07:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi1-f193.google.com with SMTP id i6so5940290oia.6 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:07:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ossystems-com-br.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=nhY7/VjlhfzG4IrSkCNUreQP5cuTqfYxDlnlfWUm0VY=; b=mqtOD7d8Uu5Dn6QUOr/xZ/qDo8ycZdV2SSi+gEl3Q2A8dv5StkiqE6N8BQYv5q2A0K Uw1mD4kCzCKrV2HdMCWS8bnp9uCQ6pbUWOEOR65XX/oQ3iaTmr/khJ/x1zG+5c/KYJpr mbTz1NdKPgvzT8FvwsasxV6/+57wrlvpTk8SHVYsGo6dIr9c6bGSklECjGT6tTt+YjGC zu4FEn57VOVkRyHIAy2spqvLlTzPT8dnUkp+6EIW3ZLufWqvREg0DCQ5WXknjguQv3HQ qudNZhQv0H2noKVxYJTWDzcokY9ezIwV0BWO4EFluYldaeimG3ru+9s5IxnTZRMQTJ2F TxeA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nhY7/VjlhfzG4IrSkCNUreQP5cuTqfYxDlnlfWUm0VY=; b=mFIhQGQYrOZev964ATVN52ycaJSSJ6fPviBWf2gy1y+7S8G77Hd58cljsPkIJYXy6J ppg05X9HDxnuPVbuJmqpu+UvxDCYXuPji4C4xHTzNccJsyRWWm70pixecguVM6xx2OIb l6uClRwTdeBYMxnkqHsGcblFP1nlYLwJDn8ux0wfGblrrHye5JLdujKE5pvth2GVyHWE 1Re+PutoFjk6dCxuKl93Fl/8Kb3Qf9L9FNfavVy0KmHxh8Df/roz3w9tyj5RZ16LTne/ ud43CkCCMRwEZmzC2pgh4og7vYSZwLvtY61MAjJyRRURehlKtP2Bh6s789vquL3vtxU0 GnRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gKj44Tv8TUnLk3egxyiXDnEusThxaMQPaejrAvOITUUX5ypD6+/ FPo22zLCSedknrxSdC1lZL8GdSn0Elv3UA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5einYxH5YC85Dy3IPVLrEB66/bgFyMidJm5w06N1Ljx+mliutIsalfPFVj1oYLmfOCnvoxMgw== X-Received: by 2002:aca:c003:: with SMTP id q3-v6mr16978323oif.45.1543273677338; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:07:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-f41.google.com (mail-ot1-f41.google.com. [209.85.210.41]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t21sm840853otq.67.2018.11.26.15.07.55 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:07:55 -0800 (PST) From: Otavio Salvador X-Google-Original-From: Otavio Salvador Received: by mail-ot1-f41.google.com with SMTP id s5so18326755oth.7 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:07:55 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:1b2c:: with SMTP id l41mr9771667otl.1.1543273674781; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:07:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181122225820.2553-1-abrodkin@synopsys.com> <8950e9f58055a8667d20ff83de1f8acd14b7f303.camel@synopsys.com> In-Reply-To: <8950e9f58055a8667d20ff83de1f8acd14b7f303.camel@synopsys.com> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 21:07:37 -0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Alexey Brodkin Cc: Marek Vasut , Tom Rini , Otavio Salvador , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer , linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] u-boot: Add mkenvimage tool X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 23:07:57 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hello Alexey, On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 7:30 PM Alexey Brodkin wrote: > On Sat, 2018-11-24 at 06:57 -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Details/202185/ > > Looking at the target name "u-boot-tools-1_2018.11-r0 do_compile" > I think it might have something to do with bump of U-Boot to v2018.11 > and the error message in question was added in v2018.11-rc1, > see http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=a4958a71017fb142542f977c843c5fce769fc6ea > > The problem is we use "sandbox_defconfig" as a dummy defconfig > because otherwise (not configured) U-Boot's build-system won't > allow us to proceed and in its turn mentioned patch adds a check > for a target platform like "if defined(__x86_64__)" which > we essentially don't satisfy and so we fail. > > There're the following solutions: > 1. Revert mentioned patch > 2. Disable "CONFIG_EFI_LOADER" > > Reverting is not nice and not future-proof. > Disabling of "CONFIG_EFI_LOADER" might be done in a couple of ways > like: > 1. Patching sandbox_defconfig > 2. Filtering "CONFIG_EFI_LOADER" from "sandbox_defconfig" right before > execution of "make sandbox_defconfig" > > I think latter option is the simplest and cleanest. > > Should I send a patch for that? Let's add Tom (U-Boot upstream main maintainer) to this so he can comment. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750