Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/linux-tools: Exclude checking PE binaries from perf test

["Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>]

Florian, All,

On 2022-10-03 10:21 -0700, Florian Fainelli spake thusly:
> On 10/1/22 12:07, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> >On 2022-09-28 15:28 -0700, Florian Fainelli spake thusly:
> >>On 9/28/22 14:38, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> >>>On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:11:33 -0700
> >>>Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>Since upstream Linux commit ed21d6d7c48e6e96c2d617e304a7ebfbd17b1807
> >>>>("perf tests: Add test for PE binary format support") present in >=
> >>>>v5.10 there is an unconditional installation of PE binaries which will
> >>>>be rejected by the check-bin-arch script.
> >>>>
> >>>>Make sure that these binaries are excluded from being checked to allow
> >>>>the installation of the perf tests.
[--SNIP--]
> >>I should mention that the readelf binary in this case is the LLVM Object
> >>Reader and it does support PE/COFF which is probably why it even remotely
> >>attempts to parse the file.
> >
> >Is that a publicly available toolchain?
> >Can you share the recipe how that toolchain was generated?
> Yes that will be done.

Great!

> >Do you have special, local changes in Buildroot to accomodate that toolchain? Will you submit those changes?
> Yes a few and yes we will, provided there is interest from the buildroot
> community to have support for a GNU-free and musl-libc based toolchain.

I am personally not interested in a "GNU-free" toolchain. However, I am
very much interested in an llvm-based toolchain.

Semantics, semantics! ;-)

> The
> approach we took for now is that we provide a GNU-compatible wrapper and set
> of executable names such that you build with clang/LLVM but you don't really
> need to know about it, except where it matters.

Yes, that sounds like a good approach.

> >That would allow adding more testing to avoid such issue in the future.
> >Otherwise, I am not fan of adding such exclusion for private cases that
> >we can not (easily) reproduce, as those cases are not supported.
> Fair enough, how about we make sure the toolchain is available, can be
> re-created by anyone who desires so and then we submit the changes to
> buildroot that we have so you see the full picture?

Yes, that would be awesome!

As I said above: having support for using an llvm-based toolchain would
be very interesting!

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot