On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 09:23:01AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 09:05, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 08:57:41AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Hi Heinrich,
> > >
> > > On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 03:56, Heinrich Schuchardt
> > > <heinrich.schucha...@canonical.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/3/22 03:10, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > Hi Heinrich,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 20:21, Heinrich Schuchardt
> > > > > <heinrich.schucha...@canonical.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> riscv32 needs a different toolchain than riscv64
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt
> > > > >> <heinrich.schucha...@canonical.com>
> > > > >> ---
> > > > >> v3:
> > > > >> new patch
> > > > >> ---
> > > > >> tools/buildman/boards.py | 11 +++++++++++
> > > > >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> diff --git a/tools/buildman/boards.py b/tools/buildman/boards.py
> > > > >> index 8a0971aa40..cdc4d9ffd2 100644
> > > > >> --- a/tools/buildman/boards.py
> > > > >> +++ b/tools/buildman/boards.py
> > > > >> @@ -263,6 +263,17 @@ class KconfigScanner:
> > > > >> if params['arch'] == 'arm' and params['cpu'] == 'armv8':
> > > > >> params['arch'] = 'aarch64'
> > > > >>
> > > > >> + # fix-up for riscv
> > > > >> + if params['arch'] == 'riscv':
> > > > >> + try:
> > > > >> + value = self._conf.syms.get('ARCH_RV32I').str_value
> > > > >> + except:
> > > > >> + value = ''
> > > > >> + if value == 'y':
> > > > >> + params['arch'] = 'riscv32'
> > > > >> + else:
> > > > >> + params['arch'] = 'riscv64'
> > > > >> +
> > > > >> return params
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> 2.37.2
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > Should we instead do what ARM does?
> > > >
> > > > My patch does exactly the same for RISC-V that was done previously for
> > > > ARM:
> > > > It sets the correct value of arch in dependence of the bitness of the
> > > > architecture.
> > >
> > > Sort of. Can we use the 'cpu' for this, insteading of reading a config
> > > symbol?
> >
> > The problem is that "cpu" for riscv is not that determines this. None of
> > the existing symbols that buildman puts in a handy table are.
>
> OK, so can we fix/change that? Or do we need to add yet another field
> to boards.cfg, just for riscv?
Well, it's a side effect of what we do / don't do with Kconfig.
ARCH_RV32I and ARCH_RV64I set 32BIT or 64BIT which are also more common
symbols. It's also not that cpu should be what matters here as we have
configa/ae350_rv{32,64}_defconfig using the ax25 CPU.
--
Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
