[U-Boot] [ANN] U-Boot v2019.10 released

Tom Rini trini at konsulko.com
Tue Oct 8 14:02:31 UTC 2019


On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 03:56:41PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 08. 10. 19 15:25, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 03:15:32PM +0200, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:54 PM Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 08:50:17AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 08:42:58PM +0800, Bin Meng wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 8:36 PM Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 02:20:40PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 07. 10. 19 23:15, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hey all,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It's release day and while we've once again had some last minute
> >>>>>>>> regression fixes, I feel things are as stable as they are likely to get
> >>>>>>>> so I've tagged and released v2019.07 and I would like to thank all of
> >>>>>>>> our contributor for their efforts.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I expect v2019.10 :-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Oops.  I did get the tag right this time at least.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> To repeat something I posted about in the previous -rc release, I've
> >>>>>>>> clarified on the http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/CustodianGitTrees page
> >>>>>>>> that the "next" branch is expected to be rebased.  Why?  While I'm not
> >>>>>>>> sure if I want to apply things directly to the next branch and then give
> >>>>>>>> them some sort of automated testing, I do want to try and give changes
> >>>>>>>> some sort of build testing and similar sooner than I have, and that was
> >>>>>>>> at least a related problem.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In terms of a changelog,
> >>>>>>>> git log --merges v2019.10-rc4..v2019.10
> >>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>> git log --merges v2019.07..v2019.10
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For this next release, one big concern I have but that I am hopeful we
> >>>>>>>> will be able to overcome is that we need to remove Python 2.7 support.
> >>>>>>>> Python 2.7 itself is end of lifed on January 1st, 2020.  There's been a
> >>>>>>>> number of patches posted that get us a good part of the way there and I
> >>>>>>>> believe we can get the rest done before the deadline.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The merge window is once again open and I plan to tag -rc1 on October
> >>>>>>>> 28th, bi-weekly -rcs thereafter and final release on January 6th, 2020.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am preparing pull request and I see that release has issue with
> >>>>>>> sheevaplug board.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 01: Prepare v2019.10
> >>>>>>>        arm:  +   sheevaplug
> >>>>>>> +u-boot.kwb exceeds file size limit:
> >>>>>>> +  limit:  524288 bytes
> >>>>>>> +  actual: 524632 bytes
> >>>>>>> +  excess: 344 bytes
> >>>>>>> +make[1]: *** [u-boot.kwb] Error 1
> >>>>>>> +make[1]: *** Deleting file 'u-boot.kwb'
> >>>>>>> +make: *** [sub-make] Error 2
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I saw this occasionally when I prepared the u-boot-x86 PR during past
> >>>>> days, but I thought that was due to patches in my queue. However I
> >>>>> remember I only saw excess 8 bytes or something, not 344 bytes ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> There are also warnings about conversions to DM.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Is it OK to ignore these boards which should be likely removed?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So, how / where are you making this fail?  I know it's been noted
> >>>>>> elsewhere that this happens, and also that the EFI PR will address this,
> >>>>>> but my travis and gitlab pipelines passed.  So that implies to me
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My latest run of gitlab-ci passed as well. Again I was not sure if
> >>>>> that was due to I dropped some SPL patches that were previously in the
> >>>>> queue.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> there's some /full/path string(s) somewhere that we should find and
> >>>>>> address.  Thanks!
> >>>>
> >>>> I see a few full path to source files in the resulting binary:
> >>>> $ strings /tmp/sheevaplug/current/sheevaplug/u-boot.bin  | grep home
> >>>> /home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> >>>> /home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c
> >>>> /home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/drivers/mtd/ubi/attach.c
> >>>> /home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/net/eth_legacy.c
> >>>> /home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> >>>> /home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/drivers/mtd/ubi/vtbl.c
> >>>> /home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_bbt.c
> >>>
> >>> And we have -fmacro-prefix-map patches but our default toolchain doesn't
> >>> support it (and these come from BUG/BUG_ON) and I still don't know of
> >>> anyplace that provides a full set of new enough toolchains for use on
> >>> all of the architectures we care about.
> >>
> >> For BUG/BUG_ON in SPL/TPL, wouldn't the function name and line be enough info?
> > 
> > Note that for Sheevaplug it's the full U-Boot that's blowing up and not
> > SPL/TPL.
> 
> Anyway back to the problem. If path matters for all these cases.
> Path depends on your github username because clone is done like that.
> 
> git clone --depth=50 --branch=mainline-v20191008
> https://github.com/michalsimek/u-boot.git michalsimek/u-boot
> 
> And buildman is running without -o property. Shouldn't we setup -o
> property that it will behave the same for everybody?
> -o /tmp/ ?
> 
> Then all pathes should be the same for everybody without any dependency
> on github user name.

It's the source path not the binary path that's encoded in to the
binary, is the problem.  I don't know if we can easily / reliably do our
builds somewhere else (gitlab for example is, or will be shortly,
/builds/gitlab/u-boot in all cases) on Travis.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20191008/efb97a82/attachment.sig>


More information about the U-Boot mailing list