On Fri, 2024-01-19 at 18:48 +0100, Thomas Perrot wrote:
> Hello Richard,
>
> On Fri, 2024-01-19 at 17:22 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Wed, 2024-01-17 at 10:47 +0100, Thomas Perrot via
> > lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> > > From: Thomas Perrot <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > This release has:
> > > - Synopsys DesignWare APB GPIO driver
> > > - Zicntr and Zihpm support
> > > - Console print improvements
> > > - Smepmp support
> > > - Simple FDT based syscon regmap driver
> > > - Syscon based reboot and poweroff driver
> > > - Non-contiguous hpm counters
> > > - Smcntrpmf support
> > > - Full sparse hartid support
> > > - IPI improvements
> > > - RFENCE improvements
> > > - Zkr support
> > > - Andes custom PMU support
> > > Overall, this release mainly adds more ISA extensions, drivers and
> > > other improvements.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/riscv-software-src/opensbi/compare/v1.3.1...v1.4
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Perrot <[email protected]>
> >
> > This all seems reasonable but why is there a revert below?
>
> I reverted it otherwise the following link issue occurs:
>
> "build/tmp-glibc/work/riscv64-oe-linux/opensbi/1.4/recipe-sysroot-
> native/usr/bin/riscv64-oe-linux/../../libexec/riscv64-oe-
> linux/gcc/riscv64-oe-linux/13.2.0/ld.bfd:/src/build/tmp-
> glibc/work/riscv64-oe-
> linux/opensbi/1.4/git/build/platform/generic/firmware/fw_dynamic.elf.ld
> :54: undefined section `.dynsym' referenced in expression"
The commit should at least mention the issue.
I'm also not sure that is "Inappropriate", more like "Pending" as in
needs further investigation.
> > > ---
> > > ...re-Remove-handling-of-R_RISCV_-32-64.patch | 88
> > > +++++++++++++++++++
> > > .../{opensbi_1.3.bb => opensbi_1.4.bb} | 8 +-
> > > 2 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > create mode 100644 meta/recipes-bsp/opensbi/opensbi/0001-Revert-
> > > firmware-Remove-handling-of-R_RISCV_-32-64.patch
> > > rename meta/recipes-bsp/opensbi/{opensbi_1.3.bb => opensbi_1.4.bb}
> > > (90%)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-bsp/opensbi/opensbi/0001-Revert-firmware-
> > > Remove-handling-of-R_RISCV_-32-64.patch b/meta/recipes-
> > > bsp/opensbi/opensbi/0001-Revert-firmware-Remove-handling-of-
> > > R_RISCV_-32-64.patch
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..d14e0b73a9bc
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/meta/recipes-bsp/opensbi/opensbi/0001-Revert-firmware-Remove-
> > > handling-of-R_RISCV_-32-64.patch
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
> > > +From bfe480929bcc966e1fdf5afdde8d4c22adba7f6f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > > 2001
> > > +From: Thomas Perrot <[email protected]>
> > > +Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:16:58 +0100
> > > +Subject: [PATCH] Revert "firmware: Remove handling of
> > > R_RISCV_{32,64}"
> > > +
> > > +This reverts commit 2a6d72534d44c39e1de0614970a0dad97b1c41ba.
> > > +
> > > +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [oe specific]
> > > +Signed-off-by: Thomas Perrot <[email protected]>
> >
> > If we're going to revert an upstream change, we need to say *why*. We
> > need to revert it for some OE specific reason but what is that
> > reason?
> >
>
> I agree, maybe you have any advice to fix it in another way?
I have no idea, I've copied Khem who might or might know who to talk
to.
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#194065):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/194065
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/103782707/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
