[PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Marek Vasut]

The build failed on qemux86-64 because it couldn't execute
tools/bin2header on a host due to it being compiled with target
toolchain. Drop the incorrect EXTRA_OEMAKE and just use the one
from u-boot-common*.inc . Moreover, since U-Boot buildsystem
already strips the tools, add INSANE_SKIP = "already-stripped" .

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Cc: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
---
 meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
index 5025961..76b303e 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
@@ -3,8 +3,6 @@ require u-boot-common_${PV}.inc
 SUMMARY = "U-Boot bootloader image creation tool"
 DEPENDS = "openssl"
 
-EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
-
 do_compile () {
 	oe_runmake sandbox_defconfig
 	oe_runmake cross_tools NO_SDL=1
@@ -17,3 +15,4 @@ do_install () {
 }
 
 BBCLASSEXTEND = "native nativesdk"
+INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "already-stripped"
-- 
2.9.3

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[André Draszik]

On Wed, 2016-11-02 at 13:07 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> The build failed on qemux86-64 because it couldn't execute
> tools/bin2header on a host due to it being compiled with target
> toolchain. Drop the incorrect EXTRA_OEMAKE and just use the one
> from u-boot-common*.inc . Moreover, since U-Boot buildsystem
> already strips the tools, add INSANE_SKIP = "already-stripped" .
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> Cc: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
> ---
>  meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> index 5025961..76b303e 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> @@ -3,8 +3,6 @@ require u-boot-common_${PV}.inc
>  SUMMARY = "U-Boot bootloader image creation tool"
>  DEPENDS = "openssl"
>  
> -EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS}
> ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'

Can we keep V=1, please? (Unless it's default anyway).

Cheers,
Andre'

> -
>  do_compile () {
>  	oe_runmake sandbox_defconfig
>  	oe_runmake cross_tools NO_SDL=1
> @@ -17,3 +15,4 @@ do_install () {
>  }
>  
>  BBCLASSEXTEND = "native nativesdk"
> +INSANE_SKIP_${PN} = "already-stripped"
> -- 
> 2.9.3
> 

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 315 bytes --]

On 2 November 2016 at 12:07, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:

> Drop the incorrect EXTRA_OEMAKE and just use the one
> from u-boot-common*.inc . Moreover, since U-Boot buildsystem
> already strips the tools, add INSANE_SKIP = "already-stripped" .
>

But u-boot-common doesn't set EXTRA_OEMAKE...

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 825 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Marek Vasut]

On 11/02/2016 03:48 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> 
> On 2 November 2016 at 12:07, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de
> <mailto:marex@denx.de>> wrote:
> 
>     Drop the incorrect EXTRA_OEMAKE and just use the one
>     from u-boot-common*.inc . Moreover, since U-Boot buildsystem
>     already strips the tools, add INSANE_SKIP = "already-stripped" .
> 
> 
> But u-boot-common doesn't set EXTRA_OEMAKE...

Should be u-boot.inc , sorry.


-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 222 bytes --]

On 2 November 2016 at 19:40, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:

> > But u-boot-common doesn't set EXTRA_OEMAKE...
>
> Should be u-boot.inc , sorry.
>

Yes, but u-book-mkimage doesn't include that file. :)

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 591 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Stefan Müller-Klieser]

On 03.11.2016 00:06, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 2 November 2016 at 19:40, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> 
>>> But u-boot-common doesn't set EXTRA_OEMAKE...
>>
>> Should be u-boot.inc , sorry.
>>
> 
> Yes, but u-book-mkimage doesn't include that file. :)
> 
> Ross

I am seeing a different problem, but I guess my solution would fix this case
here, too. So I am sending it as a new thread. I hope it helps the case and
I get some discussion about the solution.

Regards, Stefan

[PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Marek Vasut]

The build failed on qemux86-64 because it couldn't execute
tools/bin2header on a host due to it being compiled with target
toolchain. Drop the incorrect EXTRA_OEMAKE, U-Boot Kbuild/Kconfig
respects the flags from OE. Moreover, since U-Boot buildsystem
already strips the tools, add INSANE_SKIP = "already-stripped" .

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Cc: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
---
 meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb | 11 ++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
index 5025961..8adc1e6 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
@@ -3,10 +3,19 @@ require u-boot-common_${PV}.inc
 SUMMARY = "U-Boot bootloader image creation tool"
 DEPENDS = "openssl"
 
-EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
+EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'HOSTCC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}"'
+EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-target = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
+EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-native = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
+EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-nativesdk = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
 
 do_compile () {
 	oe_runmake sandbox_defconfig
+
+	# Disable CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE, license.h is not used by tools and
+	# generating it requires bin2header tool, which for target build
+	# is built with target tools and thus cannot be executed on host.
+	sed -i "s/CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE.*/# CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE is not set/" .config
+
 	oe_runmake cross_tools NO_SDL=1
 }
 
-- 
2.9.3

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 527 bytes --]

On 7 November 2016 at 18:20, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:

> +       # Disable CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE, license.h is not used by tools and
> +       # generating it requires bin2header tool, which for target build
> +       # is built with target tools and thus cannot be executed on host.
> +       sed -i "s/CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE.*/# CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE is not set/"
> .config
>

Looking at the makefile this isn't the case - it's part of hostprogs so if
anyone of the host-built tools work, they all should.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 959 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 512 bytes --]

On 7 November 2016 at 20:15, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:

> Looking at the makefile this isn't the case - it's part of hostprogs so if
> anyone of the host-built tools work, they all should.
>

Just verified that the HOSTCC changes in this patch make it work for me
even after removing the sed.  Can you send a revision?

Also the u-boot series went through a number of revisions, can you verify
that the patches in poky-contrib:ross/mut match what you expect to see?

Thanks,
Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1060 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Jussi Kukkonen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2306 bytes --]

On 7 November 2016 at 20:20, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:

> The build failed on qemux86-64 because it couldn't execute
> tools/bin2header on a host due to it being compiled with target
> toolchain. Drop the incorrect EXTRA_OEMAKE, U-Boot Kbuild/Kconfig
> respects the flags from OE. Moreover, since U-Boot buildsystem
> already strips the tools, add INSANE_SKIP = "already-stripped" .
>

The INSANE_SKIP mentioned here is no longer included in the patch.


Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> Cc: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
> ---
>  meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb | 11 ++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> index 5025961..8adc1e6 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-mkimage_2016.09.01.bb
> @@ -3,10 +3,19 @@ require u-boot-common_${PV}.inc
>  SUMMARY = "U-Boot bootloader image creation tool"
>  DEPENDS = "openssl"
>
> -EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS}
> ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'HOSTCC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}"'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-target = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}"
> CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-native = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS}
> ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-nativesdk = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS}
> ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
>
>  do_compile () {
>         oe_runmake sandbox_defconfig
> +
> +       # Disable CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE, license.h is not used by tools and
> +       # generating it requires bin2header tool, which for target build
> +       # is built with target tools and thus cannot be executed on host.
> +       sed -i "s/CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE.*/# CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE is not set/"
> .config
> +
>         oe_runmake cross_tools NO_SDL=1
>  }
>
> --
> 2.9.3
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3814 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Marek Vasut]

On 11/07/2016 09:43 PM, Jussi Kukkonen wrote:
> On 7 November 2016 at 20:20, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de
> <mailto:marex@denx.de>> wrote:
> 
>     The build failed on qemux86-64 because it couldn't execute
>     tools/bin2header on a host due to it being compiled with target
>     toolchain. Drop the incorrect EXTRA_OEMAKE, U-Boot Kbuild/Kconfig
>     respects the flags from OE. Moreover, since U-Boot buildsystem
>     already strips the tools, add INSANE_SKIP = "already-stripped" .
> 
> 
> The INSANE_SKIP mentioned here is no longer included in the patch.

I just noticed that too that I forgot to update the commit message
altogether.


-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1013 bytes --]

On 7 November 2016 at 18:20, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:

> -EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS}
> ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'HOSTCC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}"'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-target = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}"
> CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-native = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS}
> ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-nativesdk = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS}
> ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
>

You're going to start hating u-boot...

Fails on the autobuilder if you're building for a 32-bit x86 target on a
64-bit x86 host:

ERROR: QA Issue: Architecture did not match (x86-64, expected x86) on
/work/i586-poky-linux-musl/u-boot-mkimage/1_2016.09.01-r0/packages-split/u-boot-mkimage/usr/bin/uboot-mkimage
[arch]

I'm guessing that it is using the host compiler instead of the cross
compiler.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1677 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1232 bytes --]



On 11/8/16 4:15 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> 
> On 7 November 2016 at 18:20, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de
> <mailto:marex@denx.de>> wrote:
> 
>     -EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS}
>     ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'HOSTCC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}"'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-target = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}"
>     CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-native = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS}
>     ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-nativesdk = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS}
>     ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> 
> 
> You're going to start hating u-boot...
> 
> Fails on the autobuilder if you're building for a 32-bit x86 target on a
> 64-bit x86 host:
> 
> ERROR: QA Issue: Architecture did not match (x86-64, expected x86) on
> /work/i586-poky-linux-musl/u-boot-mkimage/1_2016.09.01-r0/packages-split/u-boot-mkimage/usr/bin/uboot-mkimage
> [arch]
> 
> I'm guessing that it is using the host compiler instead of the cross compiler.

isnt mkimage a host tool ? why are we building it for target ?

> 
> Ross
> 
> 


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 463 bytes --]

On 9 November 2016 at 00:43, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I'm guessing that it is using the host compiler instead of the cross
> compiler.
>
> isnt mkimage a host tool ? why are we building it for target ?
>

If there's no chance that it will be ran on the target for in a SDK then
patches welcome to force the recipe to native only.

The recipe is using _append without adding whitespace, but fixing that
doesn't fix the build.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 910 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Gary Thomas]

On 2016-11-09 01:45, Burton, Ross wrote:
>
> On 9 November 2016 at 00:43, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com <mailto:raj.khem@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     > I'm guessing that it is using the host compiler instead of the cross compiler.
>
>     isnt mkimage a host tool ? why are we building it for target ?
>
>
> If there's no chance that it will be ran on the target for in a SDK then patches welcome to force the recipe to native only.
>
> The recipe is using _append without adding whitespace, but fixing that doesn't fix the build.

I routinely build and use it on my targets, so no, it's not host only.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Marek Vasut]

On 11/07/2016 09:21 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> 
> On 7 November 2016 at 20:15, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com
> <mailto:ross.burton@intel.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Looking at the makefile this isn't the case - it's part of hostprogs
>     so if anyone of the host-built tools work, they all should.
> 
> 
> Just verified that the HOSTCC changes in this patch make it work for me
> even after removing the sed.  Can you send a revision?

It cannot work without the sed, try building for target. Then the
bin2header is built for target.

> Also the u-boot series went through a number of revisions, can you
> verify that the patches in poky-contrib:ross/mut match what you expect
> to see?

Do you have a link for me ?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Marek Vasut]

On 11/09/2016 01:15 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> 
> On 7 November 2016 at 18:20, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de
> <mailto:marex@denx.de>> wrote:
> 
>     -EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC}
>     ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE = 'HOSTCC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}"'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-target =
>     'CROSS_COMPILE="${TARGET_PREFIX}" CC="${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${LDFLAGS}"
>     STRIP=true V=1'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-native = 'CC="${BUILD_CC} ${BUILD_CFLAGS}
>     ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
>     +EXTRA_OEMAKE_append_class-nativesdk = 'CC="${BUILD_CC}
>     ${BUILD_CFLAGS} ${BUILD_LDFLAGS}" STRIP=true V=1'
> 
> 
> You're going to start hating u-boot...
> 
> Fails on the autobuilder if you're building for a 32-bit x86 target on a
> 64-bit x86 host:
> 
> ERROR: QA Issue: Architecture did not match (x86-64, expected x86) on
> /work/i586-poky-linux-musl/u-boot-mkimage/1_2016.09.01-r0/packages-split/u-boot-mkimage/usr/bin/uboot-mkimage
> [arch]
> 
> I'm guessing that it is using the host compiler instead of the cross
> compiler.

I should have a fix for it all I hope.


-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 477 bytes --]

On 12 November 2016 at 18:31, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:

> > Also the u-boot series went through a number of revisions, can you
> > verify that the patches in poky-contrib:ross/mut match what you expect
> > to see?
>
> Do you have a link for me ?


http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=ross/mut-broken&id=4f6dbc99950da645dc4d0e23e0065ff8245a0e74

As the cleanups didn't really make sense standalone, I squashed the lot.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1141 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] u-boot: mkimage: Fix build of u-boot-mkimage

[Marek Vasut]

On 11/14/2016 03:45 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
> 
> On 12 November 2016 at 18:31, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de
> <mailto:marex@denx.de>> wrote:
> 
>     > Also the u-boot series went through a number of revisions, can you
>     > verify that the patches in poky-contrib:ross/mut match what you expect
>     > to see?
> 
>     Do you have a link for me ?
> 
> 
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=ross/mut-broken&id=4f6dbc99950da645dc4d0e23e0065ff8245a0e74
> 
> As the cleanups didn't really make sense standalone, I squashed the lot.

I prefer to keep the history, but OK. It looks like what I'd expect there.

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut