On Fri, Jan 07, 2022 at 09:27:05AM -0800, Tim Harvey wrote: > On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 12:27 PM Tim Harvey <thar...@gateworks.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 11:18 AM ZHIZHIKIN Andrey > > <andrey.zhizhi...@leica-geosystems.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hello Tom, > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: U-Boot <u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de> On Behalf Of Tom Rini > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 7:52 PM > > > > To: u-boot@lists.denx.de > > > > Cc: Tim Harvey <thar...@gateworks.com> > > > > Subject: [PATCH] Revert "tree: imx: remove old fit generator script" > > > > > > > > This reverts commit d9a6f0eed66a39206b13513ec914f14084c3bb73. > > > > > > > > For right now, it's too close to the release to merge the series that > > > > allows for binman to be used to generate the final images, and also not > > > > break CI, and then also merge all of the series that convert currently > > > > broken platforms to use binman instead. So, bring back this script now > > > > and remove it again for real after the release. > > > > > > Please note that this might not work, as the FIT generator script would > > > generate ITS with '@' symbols which are not compatible with mkimage due > > > to CVE-2021-27138. This revert should be complemented with the fix to > > > remove those '@' symbols as well. > > > > Correct, the revert is not enough anymore: > > MKIMAGE u-boot.itb > > u-boot.its:7.11-15.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /images/uboot@1: > > node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:16.9-21.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /images/fdt@1: > > node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:22.9-27.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /images/fdt@2: > > node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:28.9-33.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /images/fdt@3: > > node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:34.9-39.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /images/fdt@4: > > node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:40.9-45.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /images/fdt@5: > > node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:46.9-55.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /images/atf@1: > > node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:60.12-65.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): > > /configurations/config@1: node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:66.12-71.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): > > /configurations/config@2: node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:72.12-77.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): > > /configurations/config@3: node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:78.12-83.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): > > /configurations/config@4: node has a unit name, but no reg property > > u-boot.its:84.12-89.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): > > /configurations/config@5: node has a unit name, but no reg property > > ./tools/mkimage: verify_header failed for FIT Image support with exit code 1 > > Makefile:1433: recipe for target 'u-boot.itb' failed > > make: *** [u-boot.itb] Error 1 > > make: *** Deleting file 'u-boot.itb' > > make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... > > > > I don't know what had changed to cause this or when (again, I stopped > > worrying about it because I thought we were moving to binman for this > > release). There was a patch that resolved this from Oliver at > > https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2021-August/457997.html but I > > don't think that fully solves anything 'at this point' either. > > > > Even with that applied to current master I then end up with: > > MKIMAGE flash.bin > > ./tools/mkimage: Can't open spl/u-boot-spl-ddr.bin: No such file or > > directory > > arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile:167: recipe for target 'flash.bin' failed > > make[1]: *** [flash.bin] Error 1 > > make[1]: *** Deleting file 'flash.bin' > > Makefile:1526: recipe for target 'flash.bin' failed > > > > At some point over the past couple of months that patch resolved the > > building issue when using the FIT generator but I also don't know what > > else has changed that now causes that to not work. > > > > As Tom pointed out in another thread these build failures did not get > > caught by CI apparently because CI does a 'make all' which did not > > include the FIT images (that was accomplished with the 'flash.bin' > > target prior to binman conversion). > > > > Is it too late to apply the CI fix and the pending binman conversions? > > > > I know that my series has been reviewed by Marcel [1] and as far as I > > know didn't get merged simply because of the CI issue. It still > > applies and produces a valid flash.bin image. > > I was also able to merge Peng's series [2] which converts > > imx8mq_evk/imx8mq_phanbell/pico-imx8mq to binman and was able to build > > flash.bin images for them > > > > I tried to merge Adam's series that moves imx8mm_beacon to binman [3] > > and imx8mn_beacon to binman [4] but they no longer apply due to > > defconfig/Kconfig changes > > > > That still leaves the following unbuildable with > > CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR = "arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh": > > configs/cgtqmx8_defconfig:CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR="arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh" > > configs/imx8mm-icore-mx8mm-ctouch2_defconfig:CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR="arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh" > > configs/imx8mm-icore-mx8mm-edimm2.2_defconfig:CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR="arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh" > > configs/imx8mm_beacon_defconfig:CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR="arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh" > > configs/imx8mn_beacon_2g_defconfig:CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR="arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh" > > configs/imx8mn_beacon_defconfig:CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR="arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh" > > configs/imx8qm_rom7720_a1_4G_defconfig:CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR="arch/arm/mach-imx/mkimage_fit_atf.sh" > > > > Tim > > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=265765 > > [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=268380 > > [3] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=261640 > > [4] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=261822 > > > > Tom, > > I'm not familiar with the U-boot CI tool.
It's at https://u-boot.readthedocs.io/en/latest/develop/ci_testing.html (and in-tree under doc/develop/ci_testing.rst). > Is it a show-stopper that it > does not build for boards using binman for release? From what you > mentioned in another thread it was never building the flash.bin target > for the boards using the FIT generator anyway. Yes, breaking CI is a ship-stopper. That all of these boards were not previously building the final image as part of "all" is a problem. So, here's what I'm at right now. I've grabbed Heiko's patch. Everything is currently visible at https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/trini/2022-01-07-imx8-and-binman-updates/ and with this, we get some boards building and complaining as expected: aarch64: w+ imx8mn_evk +(imx8mn_evk) Image 'main-section' is missing external blobs and is non-functional: blob-ext@1 blob-ext@2 blob-ext@3 blob-ext@4 +(imx8mn_evk) Image 'main-section' is missing external blobs and is non-functional: blob-ext +(imx8mn_evk) +(imx8mn_evk) Some images are invalid But others are: aarch64: + imx8mn_beacon_2g +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) ===================== WARNING ====================== +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) This board uses CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR. Please migrate +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) to binman instead, to avoid the proliferation of +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) arch-specific scripts with no tests. +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) ==================================================== +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) Image 'main-section' is missing external blobs and is non-functional: blob- ext@1 blob-ext@2 blob-ext@3 blob-ext@4 +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) binman: Error 1 running 'mkimage -d ./mkimage.spl.mkimage -n spl/u-boot-spl .cfgout -T imx8mimage -e 0x912000 ./mkimage-out.spl.mkimage': spl/u-boot-spl-ddr.bin: Can't ope n: No such file or directory +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) make[1]: *** [Makefile:1088: all] Error 1 +(imx8mn_beacon_2g) make: *** [Makefile:177: sub-make] Error 2 and that's the problem to fix still, that ddr bin being faked out, in CI. I think I see how to do that however, and I'm going to test that out locally and then shoot this at CI and see what happens. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
