[RFC PATCH V2 2/2] kbuild: dtbs_install: new make target

[Stephen Warren]

On 11/18/2013 12:28 PM, Jason Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:23:48PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 11/18/2013 12:19 PM, Jason Cooper wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:09:19PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>> On 11/18/2013 11:38 AM, Jason Cooper wrote:
>>>>> Unlike other build products in the Linux kernel, the devicetree blobs
>>>>> are simply the name of their source file, s/dts/dtb/.  There is also no
>>>>> 'make *install' mechanism to put them in a standard place with a
>>>>> standard naming structure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, users have begun scripting pulling the needed dtbs from
>>>>> within the kernel tree, thus hardcoding the dtbs names.  In turn, this
>>>>> means any changes to the dts filenames breaks these scripts.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch is an attempt to fix this problem.  Akin to 'make install',
>>>>> this creates a new make target, dtbs_install.  The script that gets
>>>>> called defers to a vendor or distribution supplied installdtbs binary,
>>>>> if found in the system.  Otherwise, the default action is to install a
>>>>> given dtb into
>> ...
>>>> This only appears to create ${compat}.dtb, and not ${dtb} too. 
>>>
>>> See my comment, above.
>>>
>>>> So, it doesn't seem to address part of the cover letter, "In addition,
>>>> some vendors have done a diligent job naming their devicetree source
>>>> files appropriately and we don't want to break their setups." Was that
>>>> deliberate? If so, I guess I need to send some patches to U-Boot.
>>>
>>> I assume you are still pulling from arch/arm/boot/dts/*.dtb, right?
>>> Those build products don't go away with this patch, so you should be
>>> fine.  Unless I'm mis-understanding your workflow...
>>
>> Yes, but I thought the whole point of this was that everyone would/could
>> switch to running "make dtbs_install", then pulling out the files from
>> the install tree, instead of any use-case requiring obtaining files
>> directly from the source/build tree?
> 
> Yes, in the script, it checks for the existence of /sbin/installdtbs.
> If it's there, it will override the default behavior and execute that
> script.

But that means everyone (a lot of people, and all distros) has to write,
or at least download and install, such a script. Equally, that script
would incorrectly affect the naming of non-Tegra DTBs that follow the
new convention. The naming of the Tegra DTBs is based more on the fact
that they're the Tegra DTBs than the fact that I'm using them.