jwillikers has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jwillikers has joined #u-boot
zibolo has joined #u-boot
mmu_man has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
jwillikers has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jwillikers has joined #u-boot
<milkylainen>
sjg1: Could you let me know if anyone makes any progress with the build failure on the 64-bit app?
<apalos>
there are no build failures, everything is working fine. We can lock the branch and take a vacation
<milkylainen>
apalos: I was thinking about u-boot-dm/efi-working
<apalos>
milkylainen: yea I know I am joking :)
<apalos>
unfortunately my mailbox is in worst shape i would have hoped to have a closer look at that
<milkylainen>
:)
<milkylainen>
Atleast it's easy to reproduce.
<milkylainen>
I dunno if sjg1 tested with some gcc 9.3 + binutils (something something?). I tried gcc 11.2 and binutills 2.37, with no new patches to thin library handling that I could see.
mmu_man has joined #u-boot
monstr has joined #u-boot
torez has joined #u-boot
smartin has joined #u-boot
yorick has quit [Quit: brb]
kmaincent has joined #u-boot
<brujah>
mrnuke: i think that padding pss is broken on spl and tpl, i am going to send a patch soon
matthias_bgg has joined #u-boot
frieder has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
tnovotny has quit [Quit: Leaving]
monstr has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
torez has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
matthias_bgg has quit [Quit: Leaving]
redbrain has joined #u-boot
torez has joined #u-boot
guillaume_g has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
mckoan is now known as mckoan|away
<mrnuke>
brujah: oh! oh! Did I break it?
<sjg1>
milkylainen: Yes if I hear anything I'll let you know
<sjg1>
Does anyone know of an ARM board with UFS that is easy to get?
<apalos>
And I dont use patman, just checpatch, but the 75l wrap somehow slipped away
<apalos>
the warning pops on QEMU? Because the change you highlight is for an actual risc-v hardware
<sjg1>
Patman also applies the patches, does U-Boot checks, etc. so detects problems that checkpatch does not. You should just be able to type 'patman -nmt' to check your patches
<sjg1>
apalos: You can use 'buildman riscv' to see it
<apalos>
ok let me try that
<sjg1>
apalos: Need to use something like: (void *)(ulong)gd->arch.firmware_fdt_addr
<apalos>
uintptr_t
<apalos>
hmm buildman doesnt seem to do anything here
<apalos>
I've downloaded the toolchanins
<apalos>
ah right, the same function exists in QEMU as well. That's were the error comes from not the Anandtech device
<sjg1>
apalos: We use ulong in U-Boot :-)
<sjg1>
apalos: What do you mean by buildman not doing anything?
<apalos>
sjg1: /tools/buildman/buildman riscv
<apalos>
0 0 21 /21 sipeed_maix_smode
<apalos>
and that's pretty much all the output I am seeing
<apalos>
sjg1: ulong might be the same size, but it's not always correct
<apalos>
Yes it might only break on ancient architectures, but why require ulong?
<sjg1>
apalos: I don't think it breaks anything. It's been a U-Boot convention ~forever so I try to stick to it
<sjg1>
it is also easier to read and typpe
<apalos>
right it's not easier to read since uintprt is there to declare the ptr part, but whatever
<apalos>
I can change that to ulong *
<apalos>
there's also segmented 16bit architectures, were that will probably break, but we dont support those kind of boards in u-boot anyway
<sjg1>
apalos: Yes it is valid and we do use uintptr_t, particularly in ported code. Oh, and EFI of course
<sjg1>
apalos: OK great. I am hoping to send a follow-on series at some point to make OF_BOARD a bool instead of a choice. But so far 16 boards fail to build...
<apalos>
yea that, we need to discuss
<apalos>
but that's for the mailing list,
<apalos>
sjg1: done
<apalos>
let me send the OF_HOSTFILE v2, it should be in a decent state
<apalos>
the of_hostfile needs approval now, since I changed a bunch of boards calling it,
<apalos>
bah ignore OF_HOSTFILE sjg1, it needs rebasing :S
<sjg1>
apalos: OK, how about sending them all as one series?
<apalos>
I already sent a v4 for the other thing,
<apalos>
the rebasing problem is because OF_HOSTFILE depends on that v4
<apalos>
dunno whatever people prefer, I'd prefer keeping them split, since many things can break
<apalos>
(from the OF_BOARD one)
<apalos>
the rebasing is minimal anyway. It's a sinlge line of code, so once we merge OF_BOARD i'll resend OF_HOSTFILE. You can review v2 normally, nothing will change