[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Oleg Lyovin]

GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
so use the one built by buildroot.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>
---
 package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk b/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk
index e2a0b7a7c9..439f003530 100644
--- a/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk
+++ b/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk
@@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ LINUX_HEADERS_INSTALL_STAGING = YES
 # linux-headers is part of the toolchain so disable the toolchain dependency
 LINUX_HEADERS_ADD_TOOLCHAIN_DEPENDENCY = NO
 
+LINUX_HEADERS_DEPENDENCIES = $(BR2_MAKE_HOST_DEPENDENCY)
+
 # For some architectures (eg. Arc, Cris, Hexagon, ia64, parisc,
 # score and xtensa), the Linux buildsystem tries to call the
 # cross-compiler, although it is not needed at all.
@@ -137,7 +139,7 @@ LINUX_HEADERS_ADD_TOOLCHAIN_DEPENDENCY = NO
 # of "its" headers
 define LINUX_HEADERS_CONFIGURE_CMDS
 	(cd $(@D); \
-		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) \
+		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) \
 			ARCH=$(KERNEL_ARCH) \
 			HOSTCC="$(HOSTCC)" \
 			HOSTCFLAGS="$(HOSTCFLAGS)" \
@@ -148,7 +150,7 @@ endef
 
 define LINUX_HEADERS_INSTALL_STAGING_CMDS
 	(cd $(@D); \
-		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) \
+		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) \
 			ARCH=$(KERNEL_ARCH) \
 			HOSTCC="$(HOSTCC)" \
 			HOSTCFLAGS="$(HOSTCFLAGS)" \
-- 
2.34.1

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

[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] linux: use host-make

[Oleg Lyovin]

GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
so use the one built by buildroot.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>
---
 linux/linux.mk | 21 +++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/linux/linux.mk b/linux/linux.mk
index 03d89cd204..408611a3cd 100644
--- a/linux/linux.mk
+++ b/linux/linux.mk
@@ -61,6 +61,9 @@ BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR += $(notdir $(LINUX_PATCHES))
 # be directories in the patch list (unlike for other packages).
 LINUX_PATCH = $(filter ftp://% http://% https://%,$(LINUX_PATCHES))
 
+# We need to override pkg-kconfig default host make tool.
+LINUX_MAKE = $(BR2_MAKE)
+
 # while the kernel is built for the target, the build may need various
 # host libraries depending on config (and version), so use
 # HOST_MAKE_ENV here. In particular, this ensures that our
@@ -70,7 +73,9 @@ LINUX_MAKE_ENV = \
 	BR_BINARIES_DIR=$(BINARIES_DIR)
 
 LINUX_INSTALL_IMAGES = YES
-LINUX_DEPENDENCIES = host-kmod
+LINUX_DEPENDENCIES = \
+	host-kmod \
+	$(BR2_MAKE_HOST_DEPENDENCY)
 
 # The kernel CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE feature requires firmware files at build
 # time. Make sure they are available before the kernel builds.
@@ -183,7 +188,7 @@ endif
 # Get the real Linux version, which tells us where kernel modules are
 # going to be installed in the target filesystem.
 # Filter out 'w' from MAKEFLAGS, to workaround a bug in make 4.1 (#13141)
-LINUX_VERSION_PROBED = `MAKEFLAGS='$(filter-out w,$(MAKEFLAGS))' $(MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(LINUX_DIR) --no-print-directory -s kernelrelease 2>/dev/null`
+LINUX_VERSION_PROBED = `MAKEFLAGS='$(filter-out w,$(MAKEFLAGS))' $(BR2_MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(LINUX_DIR) --no-print-directory -s kernelrelease 2>/dev/null`
 
 LINUX_DTS_NAME += $(call qstrip,$(BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_INTREE_DTS_NAME))
 
@@ -433,7 +438,7 @@ LINUX_DEPENDENCIES += host-bison host-flex
 
 ifeq ($(BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DTB_IS_SELF_BUILT),)
 define LINUX_BUILD_DTB
-	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) $(LINUX_DTBS)
+	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) $(LINUX_DTBS)
 endef
 ifeq ($(BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_APPENDED_DTB),)
 define LINUX_INSTALL_DTB
@@ -481,7 +486,7 @@ endif
 # Compilation. We make sure the kernel gets rebuilt when the
 # configuration has changed. We call the 'all' and
 # '$(LINUX_TARGET_NAME)' targets separately because calling them in
-# the same $(MAKE) invocation has shown to cause parallel build
+# the same $(BR2_MAKE) invocation has shown to cause parallel build
 # issues.
 # The call to disable gcc-plugins is a stop-gap measure:
 #   http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2020-May/282727.html
@@ -490,8 +495,8 @@ define LINUX_BUILD_CMDS
 	$(foreach dts,$(call qstrip,$(BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_DTS_PATH)), \
 		cp -f $(dts) $(LINUX_ARCH_PATH)/boot/dts/
 	)
-	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) all
-	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) $(LINUX_TARGET_NAME)
+	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) all
+	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) $(LINUX_TARGET_NAME)
 	$(LINUX_BUILD_DTB)
 	$(LINUX_APPEND_DTB)
 endef
@@ -540,7 +545,7 @@ define LINUX_INSTALL_TARGET_CMDS
 	# Install modules and remove symbolic links pointing to build
 	# directories, not relevant on the target
 	@if grep -q "CONFIG_MODULES=y" $(@D)/.config; then \
-		$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE1) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) modules_install; \
+		$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE1) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(@D) modules_install; \
 		rm -f $(TARGET_DIR)/lib/modules/$(LINUX_VERSION_PROBED)/build ; \
 		rm -f $(TARGET_DIR)/lib/modules/$(LINUX_VERSION_PROBED)/source ; \
 	fi
@@ -639,7 +644,7 @@ linux-rebuild-with-initramfs: rootfs-cpio
 linux-rebuild-with-initramfs:
 	@$(call MESSAGE,"Rebuilding kernel with initramfs")
 	# Build the kernel.
-	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(LINUX_DIR) $(LINUX_TARGET_NAME)
+	$(LINUX_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) $(LINUX_MAKE_FLAGS) -C $(LINUX_DIR) $(LINUX_TARGET_NAME)
 	$(LINUX_APPEND_DTB)
 	# Copy the kernel image(s) to its(their) final destination
 	$(call LINUX_INSTALL_IMAGE,$(BINARIES_DIR))
-- 
2.34.1

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

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

Hello Oleg,

On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 17:19:29 +0300
Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru> wrote:

> GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
> so use the one built by buildroot.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>
> ---
>  package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Thanks for the patch. However, could you provide some details on what
problem this is fixing? Is this due to something new in recent Linux
kernel releases that require a more recent version of make? If so, we
need to understand what is the Linux kernel change that causes that,
and what is the minimum make version that is now needed. Could you look
up those details?

Thanks a lot!

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

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Oleg Lyovin via buildroot]

Hello Thomas,

On 4/7/23 7:31 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello Oleg,
> 
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 17:19:29 +0300
> Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru> wrote:
> 
>> GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
>> so use the one built by buildroot.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>
>> ---
>>  package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk | 6 ++++--
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> Thanks for the patch. However, could you provide some details on what
> problem this is fixing? Is this due to something new in recent Linux
> kernel releases that require a more recent version of make? If so, we
> need to understand what is the Linux kernel change that causes that,
> and what is the minimum make version that is now needed. Could you look
> up those details?
> 
> Thanks a lot!
> 
> Thomas

Thanks a lot for the review.

Starting from v6.2 Linux kernel checks Make version and requires it to be >= 3.82: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2/source/Makefile#L14

It is quite old version, and we have faced the issue building kernel in our Ubuntu 14.04 based environment which have Make 3.81. However, to avoid such problem in the future it seems more safe to use host-make package and not depend on host version if possible.
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 07/04/2023 16:19, Oleg Lyovin wrote:
> GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
> so use the one built by buildroot.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>

  Applied both to master, after reworking the commit messages to reflect that 
this was introduced in Linux 6.2.

  Regards,
  Arnout

> ---
>   package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk | 6 ++++--
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk b/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk
> index e2a0b7a7c9..439f003530 100644
> --- a/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk
> +++ b/package/linux-headers/linux-headers.mk
> @@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ LINUX_HEADERS_INSTALL_STAGING = YES
>   # linux-headers is part of the toolchain so disable the toolchain dependency
>   LINUX_HEADERS_ADD_TOOLCHAIN_DEPENDENCY = NO
>   
> +LINUX_HEADERS_DEPENDENCIES = $(BR2_MAKE_HOST_DEPENDENCY)
> +
>   # For some architectures (eg. Arc, Cris, Hexagon, ia64, parisc,
>   # score and xtensa), the Linux buildsystem tries to call the
>   # cross-compiler, although it is not needed at all.
> @@ -137,7 +139,7 @@ LINUX_HEADERS_ADD_TOOLCHAIN_DEPENDENCY = NO
>   # of "its" headers
>   define LINUX_HEADERS_CONFIGURE_CMDS
>   	(cd $(@D); \
> -		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) \
> +		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) \
>   			ARCH=$(KERNEL_ARCH) \
>   			HOSTCC="$(HOSTCC)" \
>   			HOSTCFLAGS="$(HOSTCFLAGS)" \
> @@ -148,7 +150,7 @@ endef
>   
>   define LINUX_HEADERS_INSTALL_STAGING_CMDS
>   	(cd $(@D); \
> -		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) \
> +		$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(BR2_MAKE) \
>   			ARCH=$(KERNEL_ARCH) \
>   			HOSTCC="$(HOSTCC)" \
>   			HOSTCFLAGS="$(HOSTCFLAGS)" \
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:

 > On 07/04/2023 16:19, Oleg Lyovin wrote:
 >> GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
 >> so use the one built by buildroot.
 >> Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>

 >  Applied both to master, after reworking the commit messages to
 >  reflect that this was introduced in Linux 6.2.

Thanks. Maybe time has come to also require make >= 3.82 globally in
Buildroot?  It was released almost 10 years ago by now:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2010-07/msg00023.html

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 11/04/2023 14:27, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
>>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:
> 
>   > On 07/04/2023 16:19, Oleg Lyovin wrote:
>   >> GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
>   >> so use the one built by buildroot.
>   >> Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>
> 
>   >  Applied both to master, after reworking the commit messages to
>   >  reflect that this was introduced in Linux 6.2.
> 
> Thanks. Maybe time has come to also require make >= 3.82 globally in
> Buildroot?  It was released almost 10 years ago by now:
> 
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2010-07/msg00023.html

  The only reason to do that is to avoid needing to make such changes in the 
future for packages that require make >= 3.82, right? That would only help for 
Linux - u-boot and glibc require make >= 4.0. For ti-k3-r5-loader the commit 
message doesn't specify what the minimum version is, but I can imagine it's also 
4.0. And I expect in the future the minimum is going to be more likely to be 4.0 
than 3.82.

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

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:

 > On 11/04/2023 14:27, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
 >>>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:
 >> > On 07/04/2023 16:19, Oleg Lyovin wrote:
 >> >> GNU make package from the host machine may be too old,
 >> >> so use the one built by buildroot.
 >> >> Signed-off-by: Oleg Lyovin <ovlevin@sberdevices.ru>
 >> >  Applied both to master, after reworking the commit messages to
 >> >  reflect that this was introduced in Linux 6.2.
 >> Thanks. Maybe time has come to also require make >= 3.82 globally in
 >> Buildroot?  It was released almost 10 years ago by now:
 >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2010-07/msg00023.html

 >  The only reason to do that is to avoid needing to make such changes
 >  in the future for packages that require make >= 3.82, right? That
 > would only help for Linux - u-boot and glibc require make >= 4.0. For
 > ti-k3-r5-loader the commit message doesn't specify what the minimum
 > version is, but I can imagine it's also 4.0. And I expect in the
 > future the minimum is going to be more likely to be 4.0 than 3.82.

Sure, I would just be a step towards requiring make 4.0 (which is also
10 years old by now:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/make-w32/2013-10/msg00021.html), but
true - We can also just consider going straight from 3.81 to 4.0.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[David Laight]

From: Peter Korsgaard
> Sent: 11 April 2023 14:08
...
> 
> Sure, I would just be a step towards requiring make 4.0 (which is also
> 10 years old by now:
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/make-w32/2013-10/msg00021.html), but
> true - We can also just consider going straight from 3.81 to 4.0.

I had to revert a Centos 7 from 3.82 to 3.81 (stolen from Ubuntu 13.04)
to fix an bug where make gets confused between dependency types.
(Someone else was hitting it.)

There are a variety of reasons why we build on Centos 7,
mostly because other software (not buildroot/busybox) still
has to run on it and it is useful to use a common build system.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

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

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "David" == David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> writes:

 > From: Peter Korsgaard
 >> Sent: 11 April 2023 14:08
 > ...
 >> 
 >> Sure, I would just be a step towards requiring make 4.0 (which is also
 >> 10 years old by now:
 >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/make-w32/2013-10/msg00021.html), but
 >> true - We can also just consider going straight from 3.81 to 4.0.

 > I had to revert a Centos 7 from 3.82 to 3.81 (stolen from Ubuntu 13.04)
 > to fix an bug where make gets confused between dependency types.
 > (Someone else was hitting it.)

 > There are a variety of reasons why we build on Centos 7,
 > mostly because other software (not buildroot/busybox) still
 > has to run on it and it is useful to use a common build system.

OK, but (as I'm sure you are painfully aware of), supporting such old
systems gets harder and harder over time. Would building in a chroot or
container be an option?

According to
https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/red-hat-enterprise-linux-rhel,
RHEL7 will be EOL in ~1 year from now (June 30th, 2024), so perhaps it
makes sense to only move to require make 4.0 in for 2024.02.x.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] package/linux-headers: use host-make

[David Laight]

From: Peter Korsgaard
> Sent: 11 April 2023 14:27
> 
> >>>>> "David" == David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> writes:
> 
>  > From: Peter Korsgaard
>  >> Sent: 11 April 2023 14:08
>  > ...
>  >>
>  >> Sure, I would just be a step towards requiring make 4.0 (which is also
>  >> 10 years old by now:
>  >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/make-w32/2013-10/msg00021.html), but
>  >> true - We can also just consider going straight from 3.81 to 4.0.
> 
>  > I had to revert a Centos 7 from 3.82 to 3.81 (stolen from Ubuntu 13.04)
>  > to fix an bug where make gets confused between dependency types.
>  > (Someone else was hitting it.)
> 
>  > There are a variety of reasons why we build on Centos 7,
>  > mostly because other software (not buildroot/busybox) still
>  > has to run on it and it is useful to use a common build system.
> 
> OK, but (as I'm sure you are painfully aware of), supporting such old
> systems gets harder and harder over time. Would building in a chroot or
> container be an option?

I was mostly pointing out that 3.82 may not be a good idea.
I already have to use a newer gcc for buildroot/busybox (mostly
for grub). So adding in newer tools isn't that much of a problem.

Getting drivers to compile/run on everything from centos 7
through to 6.3-rc3 keeps me busy!

> According to
> https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/red-hat-enterprise-linux-rhel,
> RHEL7 will be EOL in ~1 year from now (June 30th, 2024), so perhaps it
> makes sense to only move to require make 4.0 in for 2024.02.x.

Except we will have to support it until the extended death - probably May 2029.
But that bit doesn't involve buildroot/busybox.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

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