[Letux-kernel] X1600 / LX16 support - here: compile issue

Andreas Kemnade andreas at kemnade.info
Wed Feb 7 22:36:35 CET 2024

On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 15:05:40 +0100
"H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns at goldelico.com> wrote:

> Hi Andreas,
> > Am 07.02.2024 um 09:42 schrieb H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns at goldelico.com>:
> > 
> > Ah,
> >   
> >> Am 07.02.2024 um 09:07 schrieb Andreas Kemnade <andreas at kemnade.info>:
> >> 
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:36:58 +0100
> >> "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns at goldelico.com> wrote:
> >>   
> >>> make V=2 CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y letux_lx16_defconfig savedefconfig uImage dtbs LOADADDR=0x80008000  
> >> 
> >> and I did a make all (after make zImage not working), I did not try uImage (which works).
> >> 
> >> Lets hope the kernel ci bots do the same... But ci120_defconfig works also with "all".  
> > 
> > as usual the solution is simple - as soon as you know it...
> > 
> > So I can try to reproduce with "all" and compare with other gcc versions.  
> Yes, I can now reproduce with "all" and gcc 6.3.0. And even with letux_ci20_defconfig.
> So likely we have disabled/deconfigured something which is needed for "all" to build "its"/"itb".
Then there are dependencies missing in Kconfig that should such a Kconfig from existing.
Well, we have "make randconfig" and any config generated should at least compile as it is
used by bots.

We have

So if DTB is somehow builtin and not appended, I guess it is a strong indication that we
want to use the FIT stuff and by calling make uImage we are gaming the system a bit?
Not sure yet, if I really understand it now.

But just to not stumble about a subtle thing again: Where does the dtb end
up now and how it goes to the kernel?

> arch/mips//boot/compressed/Makefile tells that this is Flattened Image Tree (.itb) image.
> Here I found a good description what it is:
> https://www.thegoodpenguin.co.uk/blog/u-boot-fit-image-overview/
> But to be honest, I do not see any benefits for the Letux projects...
> Except for the fw_getenv() issue, the U-Boot can be stable for years.
> So there is no need to pack it together with kernel images which change
> every week.

Hmm, FIT does not necessarily package u-boot. I think we were talking
about FIT earlier because of falcon boot mode in uboot skipping most
stuff there.
> And for ARM we have a single uImage for all. Multiplying this with the
> number of boards (each having a different U-Boot setup) we support, would
> just add a lot of bytes to the download server.

Yes, I doubt FIT will be useful unless accompanied by a proper process.
I personally use raw zImage /vmlinuz everywhere. bootz was invented. And
modern u-boot can even use some extlinux files, so no uboot-specific
kernel installation care on distro side needed.


More information about the Letux-kernel mailing list