[Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

Hello,

This is another reminder about the below defconfigs, which are failing
to build in Buildroot. If they are not fixed soon, they will be removed
before the 2022.08 release, expected to be released at the end of
August.

Please let us know if you are no longer interested in maintaining some
of those defconfigs.

Thanks for your contribution!

Thomas

rockpro64_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812054016

rock_pi_ni10_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812054009

rock_pi_4_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812054006

roc_pc_rk3399_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053999

raspberrypi3_qt5we_defconfig -> build failure in qt5webengine
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053961

qemu_xtensa_lx60_nommu_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053940

qemu_m68k_mcf5208_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053827

pine64_sopine_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053812

pine64_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053810

orangepi_win_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053792

orangepi_rk3399_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053790

orangepi_prime_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053786

orangepi_plus_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053784

orangepi_pc2_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053776

orangepi_one_plus_defconfig -> Device Tree syntax error
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053771

kontron_bl_imx8mm_defconfig -> -lgnutls -luuid missing when building
U-Boot. Strange thing is that host-gnutls is definitely built before
U-Boot, but it doesn't find it. for libuuid,
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_NEEDS_UTIL_LINUX=y is missing
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053608

friendlyarm_nanopi_r1_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053547

friendlyarm_nanopi_neo_plus2_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053545

friendlyarm_nanopi_neo_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053540

friendlyarm_nanopi_neo4_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053537

friendlyarm_nanopi_neo2_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053533

friendlyarm_nanopi_m4_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053529

friendlyarm_nanopi_m1_plus_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053526

friendlyarm_nanopi_m1_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053522

friendlyarm_nanopi_a64_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053520

friendlyarm_nanopc_t4_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053518

bananapi_m64_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053420

bananapi_m2_plus_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053415

bananapi_m1_plus_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053412

bananapi_m1_defconfig -> Device Tree syntax error
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053409

arm_juno_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053341

amarula_a64_relic_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053333


-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Heiko Thiery]

Hi Thomas,

[snip]

> kontron_bl_imx8mm_defconfig -> -lgnutls -luuid missing when building
> U-Boot. Strange thing is that host-gnutls is definitely built before
> U-Boot, but it doesn't find it. for libuuid,
> BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_NEEDS_UTIL_LINUX=y is missing
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053608

This is the first time I have been informed about this build failure.
I am surprised that I did not get any mail about this.

I must confess that I could have guessed that this would be the same
error as with the kontron_pitx_imx8m_defconfig. My fault.

Nonetheless I will fix that and send a patch.

-- 
Heiko

> friendlyarm_nanopi_r1_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053547
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_neo_plus2_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053545
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_neo_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053540
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_neo4_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053537
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_neo2_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053533
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_m4_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053529
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_m1_plus_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053526
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_m1_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053522
>
> friendlyarm_nanopi_a64_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053520
>
> friendlyarm_nanopc_t4_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053518
>
> bananapi_m64_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053420
>
> bananapi_m2_plus_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053415
>
> bananapi_m1_plus_defconfig -> U-Boot needs Python 2.x
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053412
>
> bananapi_m1_defconfig -> Device Tree syntax error
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053409
>
> arm_juno_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053341
>
> amarula_a64_relic_defconfig -> arm-trusted-firmware fails to build
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053333
>
>
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
> https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Thomas Huth]

Am Sat, 6 Aug 2022 22:43:38 +0200
schrieb Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>:

> Hello,
> 
> This is another reminder about the below defconfigs, which are failing
> to build in Buildroot. If they are not fixed soon, they will be removed
> before the 2022.08 release, expected to be released at the end of
> August.
> 
> Please let us know if you are no longer interested in maintaining some
> of those defconfigs.
[...]
> qemu_xtensa_lx60_nommu_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053940
> 
> qemu_m68k_mcf5208_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053827

I'm interested in keeping the qemu defconfigs alive, please don't remove
them yet. I'll try to figure out what's going wrong here.

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

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

Hello Thomas,

On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 10:14:52 +0200
Thomas Huth <huth@tuxfamily.org> wrote:

> > qemu_xtensa_lx60_nommu_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
> > https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053940
> > 
> > qemu_m68k_mcf5208_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
> > https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053827  
> 
> I'm interested in keeping the qemu defconfigs alive, please don't remove
> them yet. I'll try to figure out what's going wrong here.

So these are "special" issues. The elf2flt segfault is caused by the
changes in elf2flt to support RISC-V 64-bit noMMU, in commit
32f93b0ef2c602dfa1f5b243ba865d5b16e2fa33.

However, even with this removed, we have issues with elf2flt. See
https://lore.kernel.org/buildroot/20220725164425.7316b2e3@windsurf/ for
more details, and also
https://lore.kernel.org/buildroot/ce677d88-8f8e-2d81-4e7b-69a35a99c6b9@smile.fr/.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

Hello Heiko,

On Sun, 7 Aug 2022 00:28:46 +0200
Heiko Thiery <heiko.thiery@gmail.com> wrote:

> This is the first time I have been informed about this build failure.
> I am surprised that I did not get any mail about this.

Sorry, your issue is potentially new. It's mainly the other issues that
I have already reported in the past, and which did not get any
feedback, on defconfigs that are not properly maintained (all those
friendlyarm/bananapi/orangepi boards).

> Nonetheless I will fix that and send a patch.

Thanks a lot!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Thomas Huth]

Am Mon, 8 Aug 2022 10:26:53 +0200
schrieb Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>:

> Hello Thomas,
> 
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 10:14:52 +0200
> Thomas Huth <huth@tuxfamily.org> wrote:
> 
> > > qemu_xtensa_lx60_nommu_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
> > > https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053940
> > > 
> > > qemu_m68k_mcf5208_defconfig -> elf2flt segfaults
> > > https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/2812053827    
> > 
> > I'm interested in keeping the qemu defconfigs alive, please don't remove
> > them yet. I'll try to figure out what's going wrong here.  
> 
> So these are "special" issues. The elf2flt segfault is caused by the
> changes in elf2flt to support RISC-V 64-bit noMMU, in commit
> 32f93b0ef2c602dfa1f5b243ba865d5b16e2fa33.
> 
> However, even with this removed, we have issues with elf2flt. See
> https://lore.kernel.org/buildroot/20220725164425.7316b2e3@windsurf/ for
> more details, and also
> https://lore.kernel.org/buildroot/ce677d88-8f8e-2d81-4e7b-69a35a99c6b9@smile.fr/.

Thanks for the pointers! I had a look at the source for a while, and from
what I can see, I came to the same conclusion that the modifications for
ARM should really not have been done for m68k / binutils 2.32.

I can get the mcf5208 board back working by applying a patch like this on
top of the current state in buildroot (fixes both, the segfault and the
section overlapping):

diff -u output/build/host-elf2flt-2021.08/elf2flt.c output/build/host-elf2flt-2021.08/elf2flt.c.new
--- output/build/host-elf2flt-2021.08/elf2flt.c	2022-08-08 20:45:00.671502651 +0200
+++ output/build/host-elf2flt-2021.08/elf2flt.c.new	2022-08-08 20:45:51.105171045 +0200
@@ -346,6 +346,17 @@
 }
 #endif
 
+static int is_text_sec(asection *s)
+{
+#if defined(TARGET_m68k) || defined(TARGET_xtensa)
+  return (s->flags & SEC_CODE);
+#else
+  return ((s->flags & SEC_CODE) ||
+          ((s->flags & (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)) ==
+                       (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)));
+#endif
+}
+
 static uint32_t *
 output_relocs (
   bfd *abs_bfd,
@@ -435,10 +446,7 @@
 	 * Only relocate things in the writable data sections if we are PIC/GOT.
 	 * Otherwise do text (and read only data) as well.
 	 */
-	if ((!pic_with_got || ALWAYS_RELOC_TEXT) &&
-	    ((a->flags & SEC_CODE) ||
-	    ((a->flags & (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)) ==
-		         (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC))))
+	if ((!pic_with_got || ALWAYS_RELOC_TEXT) && is_text_sec(a))
 		sectionp = text + (a->vma - text_vma);
 	else if (a->flags & SEC_DATA)
 		sectionp = data + (a->vma - data_vma);
@@ -1901,10 +1909,7 @@
     bfd_size_type sec_size;
     bfd_vma sec_vma;
 
-    if ((s->flags & SEC_CODE) ||
-        (((s->flags & (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)) ==
-                     (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)) &&
-          !data_len)) {
+    if (is_text_sec(s) && !data_len) {
       vma = &text_vma;
       len = &text_len;
     } else if (s->flags & SEC_DATA) {
@@ -1941,9 +1946,7 @@
    * Includes code sections, but also includes read-only relocation
    * data sections.*/
   for (s = abs_bfd->sections; s != NULL; s = s->next)
-    if ((s->flags & SEC_CODE) ||
-       ((s->flags & (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)) ==
-                    (SEC_DATA | SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)))
+    if (is_text_sec(s))
       if (!bfd_get_section_contents(abs_bfd, s,
 				   text + (s->vma - text_vma), 0,
 				   elf2flt_bfd_section_size(s)))
@@ -1971,9 +1974,7 @@
    * Includes data sections, but not those read-only relocation
    * data sections already included in the text output section.*/
   for (s = abs_bfd->sections; s != NULL; s = s->next)
-    if ((s->flags & SEC_DATA) &&
-       ((s->flags & (SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)) !=
-                    (SEC_READONLY | SEC_RELOC)))
+    if ((s->flags & SEC_DATA) && !is_text_sec(s))
       if (!bfd_get_section_contents(abs_bfd, s,
 				   data + (s->vma - data_vma), 0,
 				   elf2flt_bfd_section_size(s)))

Does that look passable for buildroot? If so, I can send it as a proper
patch for buildroot (i.e. a patch that adds a patch to the packages/elf2flt/
directory) and also try to get it upstream later. If not ... I'm also
running out of ideas here ... then maybe it's really time to retire the
old boards that depend on binutils 2.32 nowadays...

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

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Suniel Mahesh]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 902 bytes --]

On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 1:58 PM Thomas Petazzoni <
thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote:

> Hello Heiko,
>
> On Sun, 7 Aug 2022 00:28:46 +0200
> Heiko Thiery <heiko.thiery@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This is the first time I have been informed about this build failure.
> > I am surprised that I did not get any mail about this.
>
> Sorry, your issue is potentially new. It's mainly the other issues that
> I have already reported in the past, and which did not get any
> feedback, on defconfigs that are not properly maintained (all those
> friendlyarm/bananapi/orangepi boards).
>

Hi Thomas,

I will try to fix the defconfigs related to friendlyarm/bananapi/orangepi
boards ASAP.

Thanks
Suniel

>
> > Nonetheless I will fix that and send a patch.
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
> https://bootlin.com
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1648 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 150 bytes --]

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

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

Hello Thomas,

On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 21:59:00 +0200
Thomas Huth <huth@tuxfamily.org> wrote:

> Thanks for the pointers! I had a look at the source for a while, and from
> what I can see, I came to the same conclusion that the modifications for
> ARM should really not have been done for m68k / binutils 2.32.
> 
> I can get the mcf5208 board back working by applying a patch like this on
> top of the current state in buildroot (fixes both, the segfault and the
> section overlapping):

FYI, a patch was posted and merged:

  https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=95402089c314fbc03b934f5fcf9c29db043d758c
  https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=9dd179d43ffe9be98035f921a0db2bf051b632fb

Don't hesitate to give a test on your side!

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfigs about to be removed

[Thomas Huth]

Am Fri, 12 Aug 2022 15:52:33 +0200
schrieb Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>:

> Hello Thomas,
> 
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 21:59:00 +0200
> Thomas Huth <huth@tuxfamily.org> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for the pointers! I had a look at the source for a while, and from
> > what I can see, I came to the same conclusion that the modifications for
> > ARM should really not have been done for m68k / binutils 2.32.
> > 
> > I can get the mcf5208 board back working by applying a patch like this on
> > top of the current state in buildroot (fixes both, the segfault and the
> > section overlapping):  
> 
> FYI, a patch was posted and merged:
> 
>   https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=95402089c314fbc03b934f5fcf9c29db043d758c
>   https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/?id=9dd179d43ffe9be98035f921a0db2bf051b632fb
> 
> Don't hesitate to give a test on your side!

Thanks, I've checked it and it works fine for me, too!

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