[PATCH v5 10/16] buildman: Detect binman reporting missing blobs

[Peter Robinson]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:46 PM Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 11:43:24PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:35 PM Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 11:29:30PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:23 PM Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 11:13:03PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 2:17 AM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Buildman should consider a build as a success (with warnings) if missing
> > > > > > > blobs have been dealt with by binman, even though buildman itself returns
> > > > > > > and error code overall. This is how other warnings are dealt with.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We cannot easily access the 103 exit code, so detect the problem in the
> > > > > > > output.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With this change, missing blobs result in an exit code of 101, although
> > > > > > > they still indicate failure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So either this or Tom's change of "buildman: Add --allow-missing flag
> > > > > > to allow missing blobs" has broken rc3 builds for Allwinner boards on
> > > > > > Fedora. Tom's isn't a clean revert and I've not had time to test that
> > > > > > but either way the SCP firmware is optional and it works just fine,
> > > > > > ATM we don't have the SCP firmware available to Fedora builds.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maybe that sort of of change to the build is expected but which ever
> > > > > > patch it is, and adding "BINMAN_ALLOW_MISSING=1" changes the error but
> > > > > > doesn't change the overall failure, I wouldn't expect this sort of
> > > > > > breakage so late in the cycle.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do either of you know which one does the hard breakage here? I thought
> > > > > > I'd highlight it now because I don't have time over the next two weeks
> > > > > > to fully investigate the regression.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, is this for 32bit or 64bit? I only have a 64bit allwinner in my lab
> > > >
> > > > 64 bit, 32 bit is EOL in Fedora as of F-36.
> > > >
> > > > > and it needs (I've been assuming, since I'm also passing in SCP) BL31 as
> > > >
> > > > BL31 isn't the same as SCP, the later is a firmware for the onboard
> > > > PMIC co-processor where as BL31 is Arm Trusted Firmware.
> > >
> > > Right, yes.
> > >
> > > > > well.  And since you're mentioning buildman, I assume Fedora IS using
> > > > > that rather than make to build everything. I'll go and think about this
> > > >
> > > > I'm using:
> > > > make pine64_plus_defconfig O=builds/pine64_plus/
> > > > cp /usr/share/arm-trusted-firmware/sun50i_a64/bl31.bin builds/pine64_plus/
> > > > make CROSS_COMPILE="/usr/bin/aarch64-linux-gnu-" O=builds/pine64_plus/
> > >
> > > OK, that's a little different than how I run make, that's why it wasn't
> > > caught at least.  I do:
> > > export SCP=/home/trini/work/u-boot/external-binaries/pine64_plus/scp.bin
> > > export BL31=/home/trini/work/u-boot/external-binaries/pine64_plus/bl31.bin
> > > make O=/tmp/pine64_plus pine64_plus_defconfig all -sj$(nproc)
> >
> > We build ~90 boards so we've historically copied it to each of the
> > board build output directories, could look at setting vars for each of
> > the loops too.
> >
> > > > I thought binman was basically default for this now.
> > >
> > > We have too many *man tools sometimes. I thought you said buildman, yes,
> > > binman assembles the images here, when invoking make.  Digging more now,
> > > thanks!
> >
> > It could easily be me getting confused, trying to balance a lot of
> > plates right now :-/
>
> OK, so yes, you've found a problem here. What I need to throw a CI loop
> at now is:
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index d48f52f2943b..b2253ac8ecde 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -1334,7 +1334,7 @@ cmd_binman = $(srctree)/tools/binman/binman $(if $(BINMAN_DEBUG),-D) \
>                  --toolpath $(objtree)/tools \
>                 $(if $(BINMAN_VERBOSE),-v$(BINMAN_VERBOSE)) \
>                 build -u -d u-boot.dtb -O . -m \
> -               $(if $(BINMAN_ALLOW_MISSING),--allow-missing --fake-ext-blobs) \
> +               $(if $(BINMAN_ALLOW_MISSING),--allow-missing --ignore-missing) \
>                 -I . -I $(srctree) -I $(srctree)/board/$(BOARDDIR) \
>                 -I arch/$(ARCH)/dts -a of-list=$(CONFIG_OF_LIST) \
>                 $(foreach f,$(BINMAN_INDIRS),-I $(f)) \
>
> Which means that this then works:
> $ (export CROSS_COMPILE=~/.buildman-toolchains/gcc-11.1.0-nolibc/aarch64-linux/bin/aarch64-linux- ; make pine64_plus_defconfig O=builds/pine64_plus ; cp /home/trini/work/u-boot/external-binaries/pine64_plus/bl31.bin builds/pine64_plus ; BINMAN_ALLOW_MISSING=1 make O=builds/pine64_plus -sj$(nproc); echo $?)
> make[1]: Entering directory '/home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/builds/pine64_plus'
>   GEN     Makefile
> #
> # configuration written to .config
> #
> make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot/builds/pine64_plus'
> Image 'main-section' is missing external blobs and is non-functional: scp
>
> /binman/u-boot-sunxi-with-spl/fit/images/scp/scp:
>    SCP firmware is required for system suspend, but is otherwise optional.
>    Please read the section on SCP firmware in board/sunxi/README.sunxi64
>
> Some images are invalid
> 0
> $
>
> And restores the old behavior, if you insist that you want binaries to be
> missing, which in your case you do on allwinner (but not elswhere, right?)

Yep, I believe that's the case AFAIA.

P