| Message ID | 1489276762-22280-1-git-send-email-trini@konsulko.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 11:59:22PM +0000, Tom Rini wrote: > On some architectures, such as arm64, KBUILD_IMAGE is not a full path > but instead just the build target. The builddeb script handles this > case correctly today and will try arch/$ARCH/boot/$KBUILD_IMAGE so we > can just borrow that logic and adapt it slightly for spec file syntax. > > Cc: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com> > Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> > --- > It is currently a mixed-bag on if architectures will use a build target > (arm, arm64, arc are certainly by inspection and a few others 'may') or > a full path (x86, blackfin, s390). Given that builddeb gets this case > correct, I think changing mkspec is the right way to go here. I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks!
Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a): > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will > still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably > important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure > everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks! The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750. Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote: > Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a): > > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that > > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to > > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will > > still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably > > important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with > > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure > > everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks! > > The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but > patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for > instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750. Ah, OK, thanks. I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :)
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:37:55AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote: > > Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a): > > > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that > > > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to > > > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will > > > still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably > > > important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with > > > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure > > > everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks! > > > > The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but > > patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for > > instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750. > > Ah, OK, thanks. I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to > easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :) I'll pick up the arm64 patch this week (I was on holiday last week). Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
2017-03-20 19:13 GMT+09:00 Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:37:55AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote: >> > Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a): >> > > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that >> > > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to >> > > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will >> > > still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably >> > > important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with >> > > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure >> > > everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks! >> > >> > The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but >> > patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for >> > instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750. >> >> Ah, OK, thanks. I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to >> easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :) > > I'll pick up the arm64 patch this week (I was on holiday last week). > > Will > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html The patch 9442211 has been applied to linux-kbuild/misc (Will acked to do so.)
diff --git a/scripts/package/mkspec b/scripts/package/mkspec index bb43f153fd8e..aa5f3db43f12 100755 --- a/scripts/package/mkspec +++ b/scripts/package/mkspec @@ -101,7 +101,11 @@ echo "%ifarch ppc64" echo "cp vmlinux arch/powerpc/boot" echo "cp arch/powerpc/boot/"'$KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE" echo "%else" -echo 'cp $KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE" +echo "if [ -e $KBUILD_IMAGE ]; then" +echo ' cp $KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE" +echo "else" +echo ' cp arch/$ARCH/boot/$KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE" +echo "fi" echo "%endif" echo "%endif"
On some architectures, such as arm64, KBUILD_IMAGE is not a full path but instead just the build target. The builddeb script handles this case correctly today and will try arch/$ARCH/boot/$KBUILD_IMAGE so we can just borrow that logic and adapt it slightly for spec file syntax. Cc: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com> Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> --- It is currently a mixed-bag on if architectures will use a build target (arm, arm64, arc are certainly by inspection and a few others 'may') or a full path (x86, blackfin, s390). Given that builddeb gets this case correct, I think changing mkspec is the right way to go here. --- scripts/package/mkspec | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)