On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 4:14 AM Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> wrote:
> Hello, > > I also suggest avoiding this, magical things happening without user > notification are bound to generate day long debugging headaches. At > least make it very clear somewhere (build output) about what linker > script is used. I agree that would be Bad. Personally I prefer everything to be explicit, like a Kconfig you can toggle on and off. I don't think it's a big problem to have many Kconfigs, as long as we organize them well. For example in the final link step, which is rather terse in most cases: > > LD nuttx (/some/where/board/ld.script) This is a good idea but isn't enough, because if you have a CI system doing build testing, it will likely miss that as long as the build completes, whether the binary is usable or not. I retract my earlier idea about making arch-level linker scripts and I think documentation and templates like you mentioned are a much better idea. Also you'll have issues with monolithic/protected builds, which have > different memory maps with even more room for customization. > > If you open github pull requests and open issues for these topics please > link them here so they can be properly discussed. I try to watch pull requests for anything that might be breaking but we all have to be vigilant as much as possible. Nathan
