| Message ID | 20200324161539.7538-1-masahiroy@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/3] net: wan: wanxl: use $(CC68K) instead of $(AS68K) for rebuilding firmware | expand |
Hi Yamada-san, On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:17 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > As far as I understood from the Kconfig help text, this build rule is > used to rebuild the driver firmware, which runs on the QUICC, m68k-based > Motorola 68360. > > The firmware source, wanxlfw.S, is currently compiled by the combo of > $(CPP) and $(AS68K). This is not what we usually do for compiling *.S > files. In fact, this is the only user of $(AS) in the kernel build. > > Moreover, $(CPP) is not likely to be a m68k tool because wanxl.c is a > PCI driver, but CONFIG_M68K does not select CONFIG_HAVE_PCI. > Instead of combining $(CPP) and (AS) from different tool sets, using > single $(CC68K) seems simpler, and saner. > > After this commit, the firmware rebuild will require cc68k instead of > as68k. I do not know how many people care about this, though. > > I do not have cc68k/ld68k in hand, but I was able to build it by using > the kernel.org m68k toolchain. [1] Would this work with a "standard" m68k-linux-gnu-gcc toolchain, like provided by Debian/Ubuntu, too? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:47 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Hi Yamada-san, > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:17 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > > As far as I understood from the Kconfig help text, this build rule is > > used to rebuild the driver firmware, which runs on the QUICC, m68k-based > > Motorola 68360. > > > > The firmware source, wanxlfw.S, is currently compiled by the combo of > > $(CPP) and $(AS68K). This is not what we usually do for compiling *.S > > files. In fact, this is the only user of $(AS) in the kernel build. > > > > Moreover, $(CPP) is not likely to be a m68k tool because wanxl.c is a > > PCI driver, but CONFIG_M68K does not select CONFIG_HAVE_PCI. > > Instead of combining $(CPP) and (AS) from different tool sets, using > > single $(CC68K) seems simpler, and saner. > > > > After this commit, the firmware rebuild will require cc68k instead of > > as68k. I do not know how many people care about this, though. > > > > I do not have cc68k/ld68k in hand, but I was able to build it by using > > the kernel.org m68k toolchain. [1] > > Would this work with a "standard" m68k-linux-gnu-gcc toolchain, like > provided by Debian/Ubuntu, too? > Yes, I did 'sudo apt install gcc-8-m68k-linux-gnu' It successfully compiled this firmware. In my understanding, the difference is that the kernel.org ones lack libc, so cannot link userspace programs. They do not make much difference for this case.
Hi Yamada-san, On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 4:50 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:47 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:17 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > > > As far as I understood from the Kconfig help text, this build rule is > > > used to rebuild the driver firmware, which runs on the QUICC, m68k-based > > > Motorola 68360. > > > > > > The firmware source, wanxlfw.S, is currently compiled by the combo of > > > $(CPP) and $(AS68K). This is not what we usually do for compiling *.S > > > files. In fact, this is the only user of $(AS) in the kernel build. > > > > > > Moreover, $(CPP) is not likely to be a m68k tool because wanxl.c is a > > > PCI driver, but CONFIG_M68K does not select CONFIG_HAVE_PCI. > > > Instead of combining $(CPP) and (AS) from different tool sets, using > > > single $(CC68K) seems simpler, and saner. > > > > > > After this commit, the firmware rebuild will require cc68k instead of > > > as68k. I do not know how many people care about this, though. > > > > > > I do not have cc68k/ld68k in hand, but I was able to build it by using > > > the kernel.org m68k toolchain. [1] > > > > Would this work with a "standard" m68k-linux-gnu-gcc toolchain, like > > provided by Debian/Ubuntu, too? > > > > Yes, I did 'sudo apt install gcc-8-m68k-linux-gnu' > It successfully compiled this firmware. Thanks for checking! > In my understanding, the difference is that > the kernel.org ones lack libc, > so cannot link userspace programs. > > They do not make much difference for this case. Indeed. So perhaps it makes sense to replace cc68k and ld68k in the Makefile by m68k-linux-gnu-gcc and m68k-linux-gnu-ld, as these are easier to get hold of on a modern system? What do you think? Thanks! Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
Hi Geert, On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 4:53 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Hi Yamada-san, > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 4:50 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:47 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:17 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > As far as I understood from the Kconfig help text, this build rule is > > > > used to rebuild the driver firmware, which runs on the QUICC, m68k-based > > > > Motorola 68360. > > > > > > > > The firmware source, wanxlfw.S, is currently compiled by the combo of > > > > $(CPP) and $(AS68K). This is not what we usually do for compiling *.S > > > > files. In fact, this is the only user of $(AS) in the kernel build. > > > > > > > > Moreover, $(CPP) is not likely to be a m68k tool because wanxl.c is a > > > > PCI driver, but CONFIG_M68K does not select CONFIG_HAVE_PCI. > > > > Instead of combining $(CPP) and (AS) from different tool sets, using > > > > single $(CC68K) seems simpler, and saner. > > > > > > > > After this commit, the firmware rebuild will require cc68k instead of > > > > as68k. I do not know how many people care about this, though. > > > > > > > > I do not have cc68k/ld68k in hand, but I was able to build it by using > > > > the kernel.org m68k toolchain. [1] > > > > > > Would this work with a "standard" m68k-linux-gnu-gcc toolchain, like > > > provided by Debian/Ubuntu, too? > > > > > > > Yes, I did 'sudo apt install gcc-8-m68k-linux-gnu' > > It successfully compiled this firmware. > > Thanks for checking! > > > In my understanding, the difference is that > > the kernel.org ones lack libc, > > so cannot link userspace programs. > > > > They do not make much difference for this case. > > Indeed. > > So perhaps it makes sense to replace cc68k and ld68k in the Makefile by > m68k-linux-gnu-gcc and m68k-linux-gnu-ld, as these are easier to get hold > of on a modern system? > > What do you think? > Thanks! > If desired, I can do like this: ifeq ($(ARCH),m68k) CC_M68K = $(CC) LD_M68K = $(LD) else CC_M68K = $(CROSS_COMPILE_M68K)gcc LD_M68K = $(CROSS_COMPILE_M68K)ld endif
Hi Yamada-san, On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 10:06 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 4:53 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 4:50 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 2:47 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:17 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > As far as I understood from the Kconfig help text, this build rule is > > > > > used to rebuild the driver firmware, which runs on the QUICC, m68k-based > > > > > Motorola 68360. > > > > > > > > > > The firmware source, wanxlfw.S, is currently compiled by the combo of > > > > > $(CPP) and $(AS68K). This is not what we usually do for compiling *.S > > > > > files. In fact, this is the only user of $(AS) in the kernel build. > > > > > > > > > > Moreover, $(CPP) is not likely to be a m68k tool because wanxl.c is a > > > > > PCI driver, but CONFIG_M68K does not select CONFIG_HAVE_PCI. > > > > > Instead of combining $(CPP) and (AS) from different tool sets, using > > > > > single $(CC68K) seems simpler, and saner. > > > > > > > > > > After this commit, the firmware rebuild will require cc68k instead of > > > > > as68k. I do not know how many people care about this, though. > > > > > > > > > > I do not have cc68k/ld68k in hand, but I was able to build it by using > > > > > the kernel.org m68k toolchain. [1] > > > > > > > > Would this work with a "standard" m68k-linux-gnu-gcc toolchain, like > > > > provided by Debian/Ubuntu, too? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I did 'sudo apt install gcc-8-m68k-linux-gnu' > > > It successfully compiled this firmware. > > > > Thanks for checking! > > > > > In my understanding, the difference is that > > > the kernel.org ones lack libc, > > > so cannot link userspace programs. > > > > > > They do not make much difference for this case. > > > > Indeed. > > > > So perhaps it makes sense to replace cc68k and ld68k in the Makefile by > > m68k-linux-gnu-gcc and m68k-linux-gnu-ld, as these are easier to get hold > > of on a modern system? > > If desired, I can do like this: > > ifeq ($(ARCH),m68k) > CC_M68K = $(CC) > LD_M68K = $(LD) > else > CC_M68K = $(CROSS_COMPILE_M68K)gcc > LD_M68K = $(CROSS_COMPILE_M68K)ld > endif Thanks, that looks good to me. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/Kconfig b/drivers/net/wan/Kconfig index 4530840e15ef..0f35ad097744 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wan/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/net/wan/Kconfig @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ config WANXL_BUILD_FIRMWARE depends on WANXL && !PREVENT_FIRMWARE_BUILD help Allows you to rebuild firmware run by the QUICC processor. - It requires as68k, ld68k and hexdump programs. + It requires cc68k, ld68k and hexdump programs. You should never need this option, say N. diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/Makefile b/drivers/net/wan/Makefile index 701f5d2fe3b6..d21a99711070 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wan/Makefile +++ b/drivers/net/wan/Makefile @@ -40,16 +40,16 @@ $(obj)/wanxl.o: $(obj)/wanxlfw.inc ifeq ($(CONFIG_WANXL_BUILD_FIRMWARE),y) ifeq ($(ARCH),m68k) - AS68K = $(AS) + CC68K = $(CC) LD68K = $(LD) else - AS68K = as68k + CC68K = cc68k LD68K = ld68k endif quiet_cmd_build_wanxlfw = BLD FW $@ cmd_build_wanxlfw = \ - $(CPP) -D__ASSEMBLY__ -Wp,-MD,$(depfile) -I$(srctree)/include/uapi $< | $(AS68K) -m68360 -o $(obj)/wanxlfw.o; \ + $(CC68K) -D__ASSEMBLY__ -Wp,-MD,$(depfile) -I$(srctree)/include/uapi -c -o $(obj)/wanxlfw.o $<; \ $(LD68K) --oformat binary -Ttext 0x1000 $(obj)/wanxlfw.o -o $(obj)/wanxlfw.bin; \ hexdump -ve '"\n" 16/1 "0x%02X,"' $(obj)/wanxlfw.bin | sed 's/0x ,//g;1s/^/static const u8 firmware[]={/;$$s/,$$/\n};\n/' >$(obj)/wanxlfw.inc; \ rm -f $(obj)/wanxlfw.bin $(obj)/wanxlfw.o
As far as I understood from the Kconfig help text, this build rule is used to rebuild the driver firmware, which runs on the QUICC, m68k-based Motorola 68360. The firmware source, wanxlfw.S, is currently compiled by the combo of $(CPP) and $(AS68K). This is not what we usually do for compiling *.S files. In fact, this is the only user of $(AS) in the kernel build. Moreover, $(CPP) is not likely to be a m68k tool because wanxl.c is a PCI driver, but CONFIG_M68K does not select CONFIG_HAVE_PCI. Instead of combining $(CPP) and (AS) from different tool sets, using single $(CC68K) seems simpler, and saner. After this commit, the firmware rebuild will require cc68k instead of as68k. I do not know how many people care about this, though. I do not have cc68k/ld68k in hand, but I was able to build it by using the kernel.org m68k toolchain. [1] [1] https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/9.2.0/x86_64-gcc-9.2.0-nolibc-m68k-linux.tar.xz Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> --- drivers/net/wan/Kconfig | 2 +- drivers/net/wan/Makefile | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)