From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 14:05:09 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] Add support for building toolchains against custom kernel headers. In-Reply-To: <20180821110646.5671-1-mark.corbin@embecosm.com> References: <20180821110646.5671-1-mark.corbin@embecosm.com> Message-ID: <20180821140509.162e6c49@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 12:06:46 +0100, Mark Corbin wrote: > Allows the selection of a manual version, custom tarball or custom > git repository for the toolchain kernel headers. This enables > toolchains to be built against custom kernel headers without having > to build a full kernel. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Corbin Thanks for working on this! Looks good overall, but I have a few possible suggestions of improvement. First, the commit title should be prefixed with the affected package, so something like: linux-headers: add support for custom kernel headers or something like that. > config BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_VERSION > bool "Manually specified Linux version" > + help > + This option allows you to use a specific official version from > + kernel.org, like 2.6.x, 2.6.x.y, 3.x.y, ... > + > + Note: you cannot use this option to select a _longterm_ 2.6 > + kernel, because these kernels are not located at the standard > + URL at kernel.org. Instead, select "Custom tarball" and > + specify the right URL directly. Adding this help text is good, but somewhat unrelated. Could you do that as a separate, preliminary commit ? > diff --git a/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk b/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk > index 954c6b7978..3c2509e249 100644 > --- a/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk > +++ b/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk > @@ -64,8 +64,18 @@ endef > > LINUX_HEADERS_POST_PATCH_HOOKS += LINUX_HEADERS_APPLY_LOCAL_PATCHES > > -else # ! BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_AS_KERNEL > - > +else ifeq ($(BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_CUSTOM_TARBALL),y) > +LINUX_HEADERS_TARBALL = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION)) > +LINUX_HEADERS_SITE = $(patsubst %/,%,$(dir $(LINUX_HEADERS_TARBALL))) > +LINUX_HEADERS_SOURCE = $(notdir $(LINUX_HEADERS_TARBALL)) > +BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR += $(LINUX_HEADERS_SOURCE) > +else ifeq ($(BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_CUSTOM_GIT),y) > +LINUX_HEADERS_VERSION = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_DEFAULT_KERNEL_HEADERS)) > +LINUX_HEADERS_SITE = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_CUSTOM_REPO_URL)) > +LINUX_HEADERS_SITE_METHOD = git > +LINUX_HEADERS_SOURCE = linux-$(LINUX_HEADERS_VERSION).tar.gz > +BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR += $(LINUX_HEADERS_SOURCE) > +else > LINUX_HEADERS_VERSION = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_DEFAULT_KERNEL_HEADERS)) > ifeq ($(findstring x2.6.,x$(LINUX_HEADERS_VERSION)),x2.6.) > LINUX_HEADERS_SITE = $(BR2_KERNEL_MIRROR)/linux/kernel/v2.6 > @@ -80,7 +90,7 @@ ifeq ($(BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_VERSION),y) > BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR += $(LINUX_HEADERS_SOURCE) > endif First, I'm not sure why we bother updating the BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR variable. I know we already do it, but linux-headers doesn't have a .hash file, so I don't see the point in doing this. Arnout, you reworked this in commit 24f650aed2d9d92d8cabf0cb160fcf7964f9811e, why didn't you just remove the BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR ? Second, with your change there's quite a bit of duplication between the code to handle the "same headers as kernel" case and the "custom version" stuff you've added. Could you try something along the lines of: ifeq ($(BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_AS_KERNEL),y) LINUX_HEADERS_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION_KCONFIG_VAR = BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION LINUX_HEADERS_CUSTOM_REPO_URL_KCONFIG_VAR = BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_REPO_URL else LINUX_HEADERS_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION_KCONFIG_VAR = BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION LINUX_HEADERS_CUSTOM_REPO_URL_KCONFIG_VAR = BR2_KERNEL_HEADERS_CUSTOM_REPO_URL endif and then use $($(LINUX_HEADERS_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION_KCONFIG_VAR)) and $($(LINUX_HEADERS_CUSTOM_REPO_URL_KCONFIG_VAR)) to avoid duplicating all the logic testing if we have a tarball, or a Git repo, or, etc. Note that I haven't tried to refactor the code myself, perhaps there are some obstacles to achieve this, perhaps it makes the code uglier, but I think it is worth trying. Also, a few comments after the key "else" and "endif" would help figure out where each condition starts/stops, at least for the large conditions, where it's hard to know when they start/stop. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com