Hi Alex, On 24 May 2018 at 06:32, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: > > > On 16.05.18 17:42, Simon Glass wrote: >> With sandbox these values depend on the host system. Let's assume that it >> is x86_64 for now. >> >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >> --- >> >> Changes in v4: None >> Changes in v3: None >> Changes in v2: None >> >> include/config_distro_bootcmd.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >> b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >> index 8d5feb3ac77..97d6baab4be 100644 >> --- a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >> +++ b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >> @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ >> #elif defined(CONFIG_ARM) >> #define BOOTENV_EFI_PXE_ARCH "0xa" >> #define BOOTENV_EFI_PXE_VCI "PXEClient:Arch:00010:UNDI:003000" >> -#elif defined(CONFIG_X86) >> +#elif defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_SANDBOX) > > Why not > > #elif defined(CONFIG_X86) || (defined(CONFIG_SANDBOX) && > defined(__x86_64__)) > > and similar for other architectures? That way we should be quite safe in > determining our target architecture, no?
I suspect that would work, although I think it would need to be done centrally, rather than ad-hoc in files that need to know the sandbox host architecture. We are not currently aware of the sandbox host architecture, but I wonder whether we are going to have to teach the build system about it. Does U-Boot sandbox actually run on ARM platforms? I have not tried it. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
