Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1601469 > unrolled thread

Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full path

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full  path Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> - 2017-03-15 16:00 +0100
    Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full  path Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com> - 2017-03-15 16:10 +0100
      Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full  path Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> - 2017-03-15 16:40 +0100
        Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full  path Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2017-03-20 11:20 +0100
          Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full path Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2017-03-20 18:10 +0100

#1601469 — Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full path

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 11:59:22PM +0000, Tom Rini wrote:

> On some architectures, such as arm64, KBUILD_IMAGE is not a full path
> but instead just the build target.  The builddeb script handles this
> case correctly today and will try arch/$ARCH/boot/$KBUILD_IMAGE so we
> can just borrow that logic and adapt it slightly for spec file syntax.
> 
> Cc: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com>
> Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
> ---
> It is currently a mixed-bag on if architectures will use a build target
> (arm, arm64, arc are certainly by inspection and a few others 'may') or
> a full path (x86, blackfin, s390).  Given that builddeb gets this case
> correct, I think changing mkspec is the right way to go here.

I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
it was brought up again just before I sent my patch.  I just want to
point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
still not have a functional rpm build target.  This is at least probably
important for arm.  Of course all of those could also be addressed with
a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
everything gets fixed one way or another.  Thanks!

-- 
Tom

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1601481

Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
> I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
> it was brought up again just before I sent my patch.  I just want to
> point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
> still not have a functional rpm build target.  This is at least probably
> important for arm.  Of course all of those could also be addressed with
> a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
> everything gets fixed one way or another.  Thanks!

The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.

Michal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1601494

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
> Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
> > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
> > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch.  I just want to
> > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
> > still not have a functional rpm build target.  This is at least probably
> > important for arm.  Of course all of those could also be addressed with
> > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
> > everything gets fixed one way or another.  Thanks!
> 
> The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
> patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
> instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.

Ah, OK, thanks.  I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to
easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :)

-- 
Tom

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1604329

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:37:55AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
> > Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
> > > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
> > > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch.  I just want to
> > > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
> > > still not have a functional rpm build target.  This is at least probably
> > > important for arm.  Of course all of those could also be addressed with
> > > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
> > > everything gets fixed one way or another.  Thanks!
> > 
> > The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
> > patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
> > instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.
> 
> Ah, OK, thanks.  I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to
> easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :)

I'll pick up the arm64 patch this week (I was on holiday last week).

Will

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1604816 — Re: kbuild/mkspec: Fix architectures where KBUILD_IMAGE isn't a full path

2017-03-20 19:13 GMT+09:00 Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:37:55AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
>> > Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
>> > > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
>> > > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch.  I just want to
>> > > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
>> > > still not have a functional rpm build target.  This is at least probably
>> > > important for arm.  Of course all of those could also be addressed with
>> > > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
>> > > everything gets fixed one way or another.  Thanks!
>> >
>> > The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
>> > patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
>> > instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.
>>
>> Ah, OK, thanks.  I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to
>> easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :)
>
> I'll pick up the arm64 patch this week (I was on holiday last week).
>
> Will
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



The patch 9442211 has been applied to linux-kbuild/misc
(Will acked to do so.)





-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web