On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:24:07PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Heiko, > > On 26 March 2017 at 16:38, Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> wrote: > > Am Sonntag, 26. März 2017, 15:28:44 CEST schrieb Simon Glass: > >> Hi Heiko, > >> > >> On 26 March 2017 at 15:00, Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> wrote: > >> > Am Sonntag, 26. März 2017, 22:52:16 CEST schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > >> >> Am Sonntag, 26. März 2017, 22:41:35 CEST schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > >> >> > Am Sonntag, 26. März 2017, 22:13:08 CEST schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > >> >> > > Am Sonntag, 26. März 2017, 14:00:51 CEST schrieb Simon Glass: > >> >> > > > Hi Heiko, > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On 26 March 2017 at 13:59, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> >> > > > > Hi Heiko, > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > On 26 March 2017 at 13:06, Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> > >> >> > > > > wrote: > >> >> > > > >> Hi Simon, > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> Am Samstag, 25. März 2017, 20:39:08 CEST schrieb Simon Glass: > >> >> > > > >>> On 23 March 2017 at 17:41, Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> > >> >> > > > >>> wrote: > >> >> > > > >>> > The Rock is a RK3188 based single board computer by Radxa. > >> >> > > > >>> > Currently it still relies on the proprietary DDR init and > >> >> > > > >>> > cannot use the generic SPL, but at least is able to boot > >> >> > > > >>> > a linux kernel and system up to a regular login prompt. > >> >> > > > >>> > > >> >> > > > >>> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> > >> >> > > > >>> > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > >> >> > > > >>> > Tested-by: Kever Yang <kever.y...@rock-chips.com> > >> >> > > > >>> > --- > >> >> > > > >>> > arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + > >> >> > > > >>> > arch/arm/dts/rk3188-radxarock.dts | 382 > >> >> > > > >>> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >> > > > >>> > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3188/Kconfig | 11 + > >> >> > > > >>> > board/radxa/rock/Kconfig | 15 ++ > >> >> > > > >>> > board/radxa/rock/MAINTAINERS | 6 + > >> >> > > > >>> > board/radxa/rock/Makefile | 7 + > >> >> > > > >>> > board/radxa/rock/rock.c | 7 + > >> >> > > > >>> > configs/rock_defconfig | 58 ++++++ > >> >> > > > >>> > include/configs/rock.h | 30 +++ > >> >> > > > >>> > 9 files changed, 517 insertions(+) > >> >> > > > >>> > create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3188-radxarock.dts > >> >> > > > >>> > create mode 100644 board/radxa/rock/Kconfig > >> >> > > > >>> > create mode 100644 board/radxa/rock/MAINTAINERS > >> >> > > > >>> > create mode 100644 board/radxa/rock/Makefile > >> >> > > > >>> > create mode 100644 board/radxa/rock/rock.c > >> >> > > > >>> > create mode 100644 configs/rock_defconfig > >> >> > > > >>> > create mode 100644 include/configs/rock.h > >> >> > > > >>> > >> >> > > > >>> I am still having trouble applying this patch. I get build > >> >> > > > >>> errors: > >> >> > > > >>> > >> >> > > > >>> arm: + rock > >> >> > > > >>> +arch/arm/Makefile:22: CONFIG_CPU_V7 -march=armv7-a > >> >> > > > >>> +make[2]: *** No rule to make target 'dts/dt.dtb', needed by > >> >> > > > >>> 'tpl/u-boot-tpl.dtb'. Stop. > >> >> > > > >>> +make[1]: *** [tpl/u-boot-tpl.bin] Error 2 > >> >> > > > >>> +make: *** [sub-make] Error 2 > >> >> > > > >>> 0 0 1 /1 rock > >> >> > > > >>> > >> >> > > > >>> Also there seems to be a duplicate config: > >> >> > > > >>> > >> >> > > > >>> arm: + rock > >> >> > > > >>> +In file included from include/configs/rock.h:11:0, > >> >> > > > >>> + from include/config.h:5, > >> >> > > > >>> + from include/common.h:21, > >> >> > > > >>> + from arch/arm/lib/asm-offsets.c:15: > >> >> > > > >>> + #define CONFIG_SYS_THUMB_BUILD > >> >> > > > >>> + ^ > >> >> > > > >>> + from lib/asm-offsets.c:15: > >> >> > > > >>> +In file included from include/linux/kconfig.h:4:0, > >> >> > > > >>> + from <command-line>:0: > >> >> > > > >>> +include/generated/autoconf.h:10:0: note: this is the > >> >> > > > >>> location of the > >> >> > > > >>> previous definition > >> >> > > > >>> + #define CONFIG_SYS_THUMB_BUILD 1 > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> looks like this got run over by another Kconfig migration on > >> >> > > > >> march-18. > >> >> > > > >> New patches (migration + rock board) coming up shortly. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Thanks - what toolchain are you using to test this? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Also I am still getting this error: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > buildman rock$ > >> >> > > > boards.cfg is up to date. Nothing to do. > >> >> > > > Building current source for 1 boards (1 thread, 8 jobs per thread) > >> >> > > > arm: + rock > >> >> > > > +make[2]: *** No rule to make target 'dts/dt.dtb', needed by > >> >> > > > 'tpl/u-boot-tpl.dtb'. Stop. > >> >> > > > +make[1]: *** [tpl/u-boot-tpl.bin] Error 2 > >> >> > > > +make: *** [sub-make] Error 2 > >> >> > > > 0 0 1 /1 rock > >> >> > > > >> >> > > that is really strange. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I'm building with the armhf cross-compiler from Debian testing, > >> >> > > which is > >> >> > > > >> >> > > arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc (Debian 6.3.0-5) 6.3.0 20170124 > >> >> > > > >> >> > > My git history also is up-to-date it seems: > >> >> > > 14ef0b180b rockchip: rk3188: Add Radxa Rock board > >> >> > > d0348986cc rockchip: rk3188: follow THUMB_BUILD Kconfig migration > >> >> > > 3bffe88d68 rockchip: video: Split out HDMI controller code > >> >> > > a188a5a35c rockchip: i2c: Add compatibles for Rockchip Cortex-A9 > >> >> > > socs > >> >> > > 903fae5666 rockchip: rk3188: Setup the armclk in spl > >> >> > > 7957cc4bd0 rockchip: clk: rk3188: Allow configuration of the armclk > >> >> > > > >> >> > > with 3bffe88d68 being your current head and my build commands being > >> >> > > > >> >> > > make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf- clean > >> >> > > make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf- rock_defconfig > >> >> > > make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf- > >> >> > > >> >> > that also works with a "make mrproper" before everything else. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Strangely the tpl shouldn't require a dtb at all, as it needs to use > >> >> > > OF_PLATDATA. Am I missing some config option somewhere? > >> >> > > >> >> > I also did play around a bit with buildman just now: > >> >> > > >> >> > At first I forgot the "$" after rock, so build everything with rock > >> >> > in the > >> >> > name and the radxarock failed because the somewhat old 4.9 toolchain > >> >> > used seems to produce a TPL image that is over the size constraints. > >> >> > I.e. 1020 bytes on 4.9 vs. 792 bytes on 6.3.0 . > >> >> > > >> >> > When I drop the SPL_MAX_SIZE from rk3188_common.h for the TPL build > >> >> > tools/buildman/buildman -P rock > >> >> > builds 14 boards and finishes sucessfully including the radxarock. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Now when I try buildman -P rock$ I seem to also get the error about > >> >> > the > >> >> > missing dts/dt.dtb , which does not occur in my regular builds and > >> >> > also > >> >> > not when building the bigger number of boards. I guess I need to > >> >> > figure > >> >> > out what is different in that case. > >> >> > >> >> sorry for spamming, but > >> >> > >> >> also when entering .bm-work/rock where buildman failed and doing just my > >> >> > >> >> make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf- > >> >> > >> >> in that directory created by buildman, produces perfectly fine images. > >> >> (buildman does create the .config, so I'm just finishing the build, > >> >> buildman > >> >> failed at for unknown reasons) > >> > > >> > and a > >> > tools/buildman/buildman -PVv -T1 -j1 rock$ > >> > > >> > also finishes sucessfully, so it looks like that is more some sort of > >> > build > >> > concurrency issue, with the platdata not being created in time for some > >> > reason. > >> > >> Yes I think that is right. I will see if I can fix that. > >> > >> Re the toolchain, if I pull in this patch then I will likely cause a > >> build breakable on common toolchains. What do you think is the best > >> option? Can the TPL be shrunk a little with gcc 4.9? > > > > I've added Tom for comments, executive summary: > > - rk3188-tpl is size limited to 1020 bytes > > - gcc 6.3 produces a rk3188-tpl of 792 bytes > > - gcc 4.9 makes it 1020 bytes > > - buildman seems to always use gcc-4.9 > > - rk3188 board does not compile with buildman > > > > > > Isn't holding on to a pretty old compiler for everything somewhat > > strange? ;-) > > Well it's not that old. 4.6 would be old. We do need to be careful not > to drop old toolchains too aggressively, although for new platforms > such as this is doesn't matter. I try to test with older things to > avoid problems applying things to mainline (with Tom's automated > tests, etc.)
wrt buildman using certain toolchains, it comes down to the order in which it finds matches for a given arch and then it picks (and I don't recall which off the top of my head) the first or last match. I do agree that gcc-4.9 isn't something we can drop just yet (as for example it's what'll be used in travis-ci today. But it's getting pretty long in the tooth and we will have to at some point say that "platform X requires gcc-6.x or later" as we start running into hard walls that are solved in 6.x. Finally, I have no objection to adding TPL_USE_ARCH_MEMSET as an option so that in cases like this it can be disabled due to space just as it is on SPL. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
