Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/1] boot/uboot/uboot.mk: add stripped u-boot.elf support

From: "Frager, Neal via buildroot" <buildroot@buildroot.org>
To: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>
Cc: "thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	"buildroot@buildroot.org" <buildroot@buildroot.org>
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/1] boot/uboot/uboot.mk: add stripped u-boot.elf support
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 18:04:00 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CH2PR12MB50040C5CEDA3DAF66901442DF00A9@CH2PR12MB5004.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221121154917.59ce2022@booty>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1691 bytes --]

Hi Luca,

> Hello everyone,
> 
> Just a friendly reminder regarding this patch.  Any feedback?
> 
> If a user requests a u-boot binary in elf format, they may actually want the stripped u-boot.elf version.
> This patch provides the stripped u-boot.elf binary.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
> ---
>  boot/uboot/uboot.mk | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk index 
> 0439ec5e4b..216efc5a13 100644
> --- a/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> +++ b/boot/uboot/uboot.mk
> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ UBOOT_BINS += u-boot.dtb  endif
>  
>  ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_ELF),y)
> -UBOOT_BINS += u-boot
> +UBOOT_BINS += u-boot u-boot.elf

> This assumes BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_ELF will always result in building u-boot.elf, but I don't think this is true for all platforms.

> At a quick test with a RISC-V build and BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_ELF=y I got a failure with your patch applied because u-boot is produced but u-boot.elf isn't.

Thank you for this feedback.  I was not aware that some platforms generate a u-boot file, but not a u-boot.elf file.

I could just use the u-boot file with the versal builds, but I would prefer to use the u-boot.elf file, so that I fully match the way PetaLinux and Yocto work.

Do you have any suggestions for getting the u-boot.elf file, if it is not available for all platforms?  

Would it be acceptable to add a define specific to this version of elf file such as BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_STRIPPED_ELF?  This would still fail, of course, if built with a RISC-V configuration, so I am not sure what to do.

Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD

[-- Attachment #2: winmail.dat --]
[-- Type: application/ms-tnef, Size: 14756 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 150 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot