Hi Ondřej, On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 14:11, Ondřej Jirman <meg...@megous.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 08:00:50PM +0000, Joe Hershberger wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 2:53 PM Ondřej Jirman <meg...@megous.com> wrote: > > > > It sounds like your board / build config is not in the mainline tree, > > > > so there is no way Simon could have known it would break you, and it > > > > didn't break the existing boards, hence his comment. I strongly > > > > encourage you to send a series adding your config so that it has an > > > > opportunity to be build tested. > > > > > > I'm using orangepi_pc_defconfig. It's mainline. > > > > > > I just disable a few things, like USB and NET. That's enough for it to > > > break the build. > > > > Clearly the point is that the actual problematic config is not mainline. > > > > > I don't think my minimalistic config would be proper as a defconfig for > > > that > > > particular board. > > > > I was not suggesting to replace it, simply to add a minimal one. There > > are plenty of examples of boards with several defconfigs. > > Interesting, I may add one then. Not sure what sunxi maintainer will think of > that, but if it has value for testing, why not. Probably just one minimal > config would have caught this, so I guess it has some value. > > Thanks for suggestion. > > > > Anyway, the kernel has feature that generates random > > > configs for revealing these kinds of issues. > > > > Are you suggesting that you can port this to U-Boot so we can test in > > a similar way? > > It's a Kconfig feature, you can already use it. Try make randconfig inside > u-boot.
Another suggestion that might be better: add a new sandbox_nonet build. I suspect this would throw up quite a few issues. Also since it is more generic the build coverage would likely be better. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
