[LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target

John Crispin john at phrozen.org
Tue Sep 27 22:16:05 PDT 2016 


On 27/09/2016 13:39, Y.T. Jiang wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> After the survey found, the error are from a old usb2.0(USB_EHCI_FSL) driver which is usually used for powerpc arch, not for layerscape ls1043ardb(arm64 arch) Soc.
> The default kernel config and packages not enable the old usb2.0 driver in my patch. It should be enabled by:
> [x] Select all target specific packages by default
> [x] Select all kernel module packages by default
> [x] Select all userspace packages by
> 
> Further investigation found, if remove the kernel patch 8041, can avoid USB_EHCI_FSL be compiled. But the patch hint, USB_EHCI_FSL will appear in other arch.
> 8041-usb-kconfig-remove-dependency-FSL_SOC-for-ehci-fsl-d.patch
> "usb: kconfig: remove dependency FSL_SOC for ehci fsl driver "
> CONFIG_USB_EHCI_FSL is not dependent on FSL_SOC, it can be built on non-PPC platforms.
> ...
>  21  config USB_EHCI_FSL
>  22     tristate "Support for Freescale PPC on-chip EHCI USB controller"
>  23 -   depends on FSL_SOC
>  24 +   depends on USB_EHCI_HCD
> ...
> 

so this patch is indeed added by your series, yet the module does not
build. i would suggest dropping this patch as it seems totally unrelated
and in fact makes it not work. does your target use FSL EHCI support ?

	John

> If have other better ways in dealing with the dependencies in LEDE?
> 
> 
> Thanks & Best Regards
> Jiang Yutang
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Crispin [mailto:john at phrozen.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 2:34 PM
>> To: Y.T. Jiang
>> Cc: LEDE Development List
>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> i just tried V5 and when building the target with all packages selected i
>> run into some errors
>>
>> make[5]: Entering directory
>> `/home/blogic/source/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-
>> layerscape_64b/linux-4.4.21'
>>   CHK     include/config/kernel.release
>>   CHK     include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
>>   CHK     include/generated/utsrelease.h
>>   CHK     include/generated/bounds.h
>>   CHK     include/generated/timeconst.h
>>   CHK     include/generated/asm-offsets.h
>>   CALL    scripts/checksyscalls.sh
>>   CC [M]  drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.o
>> In file included from drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:39:0:
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_readl':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:741:9: error: implicit declaration of function
>> 'readl' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>   return readl(regs);
>>          ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h: In function 'ehci_writel':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:768:3: error: implicit declaration of function
>> 'writel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>    writel(val, regs);
>>    ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'fsl_ehci_drv_probe':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:130:3: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'clrsetbits_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>    clrsetbits_be32(hcd->regs + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
>>    ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_setup_phy':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:205:4: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'clrbits32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>     clrbits32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL,
>>     ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:244:9: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'in_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>    if (!(in_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_CTRL) & PHY_CLK_VALID)) {
>>          ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c: In function 'ehci_fsl_usb_setup':
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:276:3: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'out_be32' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>    out_be32(non_ehci + FSL_SOC_USB_SNOOP1, 0x0 | SNOOP_SIZE_2GB);
>>    ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:9: error: implicit declaration of
>> function 'mfspr' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>    svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
>>          ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: error: 'SPRN_SVR' undeclared (first
>> use in this function)
>>    svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR);
>>                ^
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:293:15: note: each undeclared identifier is
>> reported only once for each function it appears in
>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>
>> to reproduce this run menuconfig and then Global build settings  --->
>>    [x] Select all target specific packages by default
>>    [x] Select all kernel module packages by default
>>    [x] Select all userspace packages by default
>>
>> 	John
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21/09/2016 16:21, Y.T. Jiang wrote:
>>> Hi Rafał and John,
>>>
>>> I update the patch and pull a new requests(329), please check and
>> review, thanks!
>>> https://github.com/lede-project/source/pull/329
>>>
>>> V5 patch update summary:
>>>  1.Copyrights assigned to myself.
>>>  2.Introduce DEVICE_TITLE and DEVICE_PACKAGES.
>>>  3.Rename patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx...
>>>  4.Refresh patches by "make target/linux/refresh V=s"
>>>  5.Move default packages to DEFAULT_PACKAGES.
>>>  6.Optimize Build/mk_firmware.
>>>
>>> Thanks & Best Regards
>>> Jiang Yutang
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Lede-dev [mailto:lede-dev-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On
>>>> Behalf Of Y.T. Jiang
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:28 PM
>>>> To: Rafa? Mi?ecki
>>>> Cc: LEDE Development List; John Crispin
>>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>>>
>>>> Hi Rafał,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the detailed comment!
>>>>
>>>> Update status:
>>>> prefixed with ">"			--done
>>>> Copyright				--done
>>>> make target/linux/refresh V=s		--done
>>>> Patches prefix with 1xxx,2xxx...refer target/linux/generic/PATCHES
>>>> 		--done
>>>> using	DEVICE_TITLE DEVICE_PACKAGES...refer
>>>> target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile	--ongoing
>>>>
>>>> After building and features validate, I will submit a new version
>> patch.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & Best Regards
>>>> Jiang Yutang
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zajec5 at gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 7:55 PM
>>>>> To: Y.T. Jiang
>>>>> Cc: John Crispin; LEDE Development List
>>>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19 September 2016 at 12:36, Y.T. Jiang <yutang.jiang at nxp.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you for your review and suggestion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure. One more note: please take a look at your mailer configuration.
>>>>> It should keep all quotes prefixed with "> " to keep discussion clear.
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_quoting
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:zajec5 at gmail.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 4:01 PM
>>>>>> To: John Crispin
>>>>>> Cc: LEDE Development List; Y.T. Jiang
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [LEDE-DEV] merging the layerscape target
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18 September 2016 at 14:24, John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> i have just spent some time reviewing the layerscape PR [1] and
>>>>>>> started a full build of it. its starting to look good and i cannot
>>>>>>> see any blockers. if anyone has any hold on this please let me
>>>>>>> know in the next couple of days. if i dont get any vetos i will
>> merge it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can see following Copyright line over and over:
>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2016 OpenWrt.org
>>>>>> Yutang: did you really sign a contract with OpenWrt that included
>>>>> passing your copyrights to the OpenWrt project? If not, you should
>>>>> just keep Copyrights assigned to yourself.
>>>>>> I really would like assigning copyrights to projects where it
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>> apply.
>>>>>> [I do not sign a contract with OpenWrt indeed. I refer to some
>>>>>> others target while developing/backporting layerscape, I find
>>>>>> almost of targets included OpenWrt.org Copyright, so I also put it
>>>>>> in my code files. Now should I replace " Copyright (C) 2016
>> OpenWrt.org"
>>>> with "
>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.jiang at nxp.com>" ? or retain
>>>>>> the both copyright: "Copyright (C) LEDE project, Jiang Yutang
>>>>>> <yutang.jiang at nxp.com>" ?]
>>>>>
>>>>> You're correct, current sources are messy about this. I'm trying to
>>>>> stop adding mode incorrectly copyrighted code.
>>>>>
>>>>> You should only have something like:
>>>>> Copyright (C) 2016 Jiang Yutang <yutang.jiang at nxp.com> for the code
>>>>> you have written.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> What about using some generic profile only and then using
>>>>>> DEVICE_TITLE
>>>>> DEVICE_PACKAGES to specify modules that should be included on rootfs?
>>>>>> [I will try to use the two variables.]
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks! This will allow building images for customized boards with a
>>>>> single "make" call. It's part of recently introduced
>>>>> TARGET_PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS system. You may take a look at
>>>>> target/linux/bcm53xx/image/Makefile as an example. There is only 1
>>>>> subtarget, but it should give you a hint anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Would that be possible to split patches into accepted ones
>>>>>> (backports)
>>>>> and LEDE-specific ones?
>>>>>> [The kernel patches: dpaa/qbman/fman/etc. it is really too big and
>>>>>> interference review LEDE-specially code. I will split those kernel
>>>>>> patches in folder patches-4.4 as the second, and keep the rest as
>>>>>> fist LEDE-specific,  what do you think about it?]
>>>>>
>>>>> For generic patches we have a following guide:
>>>>> target/linux/generic/PATCHES
>>>>>
>>>>> You may try to follow this, if possible. E.g. you could use 0xxx
>>>>> prefix for upstream accepted patches and some other prefix 1xxx,
>>>>> 2xxx, or whatever applicable for other ones.
>>>>>
>>>>> It isn't a strict rule for targets, but it should make your target
>>>>> easier to maintain I believe.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please refresh all target patches, right now I can see they contain
>>>>>> all
>>>>> these things like:
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index
>>>>>> 4cb98aa..a8a97bd 100644
>>>>>> 1.7.9.5
>>>>>> [I found it have conflicts in current kernel version with two
>>>>>> patches(arm64/mm related, 0060 and 0061) while backporting the
>>>>>> dpaa/qbman/fman driver, but I'm unacquainted with both mm and dpaa,
>>>>>> our dpaa team are engaged in do upstream work and can't help me. So
>>>>>> I revert the two patch to bypass this issue temporary, I would like
>>>>>> to wait for more leisure time then to thorough investigate and
>>>>>> solve it.]
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you misunderstood me. I don't have anything against your
>>>>> patches, just the format. Please call make target/linux/refresh V=s
>>>>> and that will convert all your patches to the expected format :)
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rafał
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lede-dev mailing list
>>>> Lede-dev at lists.infradead.org
>>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev

More information about the Lede-dev mailing list