From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 18:36:04 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [ANN] U-Boot v2017.07-rc2 released In-Reply-To: References: <20170708122140.GT22707@bill-the-cat> <20170709124932.GN22707@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <20170709223604.GP22707@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 12:38:19PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi, > > On 9 July 2017 at 06:49, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 10:45:52AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >> > On Sat, Jul 08, 2017 at 09:27:59AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> >> >> On 21 June 2017 at 01:07, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> >> >>>>>>> Simon, do you have some suggestions on what to do here? Thanks! > >> >> >>>>>>> > >> >> >>>>>>> -- > >> >> >>>>>>> Tom > >> >> >>>>>> > >> >> >>>>>> My guess is that there is already a libfdt.py in the system. Someone > >> >> >>>>>> else reported this too. > >> >> >>>>>> > >> >> >>>>>> We could perhaps change the ordering in PYTHONPATH so that our one is first. > >> >> >>>>> > >> >> >>>>> No, I'm not sure that's completely the case because I first saw a > >> >> >>>>> related issue before my dtc had the python patch set added to it, I > >> >> >>>>> would actually prefer to build with the distro dtc rather than a fork > >> >> >>>>> of upstream like we use to. > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> OK I think I see what is happening then. It seems to be picking up > >> >> >>>> _libfdt.so from your system and libfdy.py from U-Boot. If so that > >> >> >>>> seems like a bad idea at the best of times. > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> Despite upstreaming efforts we still have local libfdt changes in > >> >> >>>> U-Boot. The main one is fdtgrep. I did try to upstream it a while back > >> >> >>>> but failed. I've been thinking of trying again but have not mustered > >> >> >>>> the energy. > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> This particular error could probably be worked around in the short > >> >> >>>> term by dropping FDT_ERR_TOODEEP. But do we really want to allow this > >> >> >>>> sort of thing? I think we should either use one libfdt module or the > >> >> >>>> other, not a mixture of the two > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> I suspect your right but I don't want to get into a situation where > >> >> >>> something might work in the kernel and and not in u-boot or > >> >> >>> vice-versa, and as things like overlays come into play where they > >> >> >>> could be applied to either the possible differences get greater and > >> >> >>> from a distro PoV that increased the requirements of support and debug > >> >> >>> and believe me people will do weird shit that they expect you to > >> >> >>> magically fix with little information hence my reluctance to diverge. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I'm not sure what to do about this other than what I suggested. I > >> >> >> wonder it if is possible to detect the case where there is a mismatch > >> >> >> with the installation? > >> >> > > >> >> > Was that dropping FDT_ERR_TOODEEP? Why do we diverge from upstream on > >> >> > this, what does it do? Maybe provide an option to specify whether to > >> >> > use external dtc or bundled? > >> >> > >> >> So dropping dtc from our deps to try and get anything on 2017.07 built > >> >> I get for a bunch of devices I get this: > >> >> > >> >> /builddir/build/BUILD/u-boot-2017.07-rc3/scripts/dtc-version.sh: line > >> >> 18: dtc: command not found > >> >> rm -f .tmp_quiet_recordmcount > >> >> *** Your dtc is too old, please upgrade to dtc 1.4 or newer > >> >> > >> >> Can we please have some level of resolution for 2017.07 GA? > >> > > >> > Can we short term do the thing where I guess it was PYTHONPATH gets > >> > modified so that you only pick up U-Boot provided parts here? > >> > >> Sure, as long as we have a commitment to a read fix for 2017.09 > > > > The "real" fix is to get upstream libfdt stuff in sync with us again, > > yes? If so, yes, I think we can agree that we need to sync up with them > > and get on the same page. > > It would be easy enough to drop the new error. I think that would fix > the current problem. I synced libfdt after the Python library was > applied upstream, so it may be possible to mix and match dtc now. > > Re fdtgrep I did send fdtgrep patches to the list a long time ago but > it did not go anywhere. For v3 there was a long delay and then this > comment: > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree-compiler/msg00108.html > > I have been meaning to try again with something smaller as I think it > is a useful tool. OK, so I need a patch for the moment then please, thanks! -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: