Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] buildman: differentiate between riscv32, riscv64

[Heinrich Schuchardt]

On 10/3/22 18:44, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Heinrich,

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 10:08, Heinrich Schuchardt
<heinrich.schucha...@canonical.com> wrote:

riscv32 needs a different toolchain than riscv64

Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schucha...@canonical.com>
---
v4:
         no change
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

Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>

I think I understand this better. Can we detect a boards.cfg file
which needs updating? Or perhaps the existing output_is_new() function
is good enough?

output_is_new() only checks the change date of files called *_defconfig, 
Kconfig*, MAINTAINERS. You could check the date of file boards.py too.

Best regards

Heinrich