On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 04:31:37PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 13.09.21 14:34, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 09:57:45AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 11.09.21 02:10, Tom Rini wrote: > >>> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 04:24:05PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>> > >>>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> > >>>> > >>>> This allows to use the watchdog in custom scripts but does not enforce > >>>> that the OS has to support it as well. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> > >>> > >>> Sorry for the late reply. This causes CI to fail: > >>> Building current source for 1 boards (1 thread, 16 jobs per thread) > >>> aarch64: + iot2050 > >>> +(iot2050) WARNING ATF file bl31.bin NOT found, resulting binary is > >>> non-functional > >>> +(iot2050) WARNING OPTEE file bl32.bin NOT found, resulting might be > >>> non-functional > >>> +(iot2050) binman: Filename 'k3-rti-wdt.fw' not found in input path > >>> (.,/home/trini/work/u-boot/u-boot,board/siemens/iot2050,arch/arm/dts) > >>> (cwd='/tmp/iot2050/.bm-work/iot2050') > >>> +(iot2050) make[1]: *** [all] Error 1 > >>> +(iot2050) make: *** [sub-make] Error 2 > >>> 0 0 1 /1 iot2050 > >>> > >>> And needs to be handled like ATF/OPTEE/etc where CI can build but throw > >>> a "THIS WILL NOT RUN CORRECTLY" type warning to the user. > >>> > >> > >> I was about to sent an update anyway - time passed, and now we even have > >> support for the next generation integrated from the beginning. But > >> related upstream DT changes are not yet merged. > > > > OK. > > > >> But back to this issue: How can CI be fed with all those required > >> binaries? The build makes no sense in their absence. > > > > To be clearer, CI isn't fed all of the binaries, we just use /dev/null > > in that case and try and make it clear it won't boot. K3 isn't a good > > example here, but I think sunxi uses binman and handles this same class > > of problem? > > > > I'm seeing it additionally carrying a "missing-msg" property, but that > alone (even with missing-blob-help updated) does not make the build > pass. It rather seems I'm missing some "allow_missing" property for that > image, but even reading the code gives no clue yet how to achieve that. > Yet another binman mystery.
You might also need a new file in tools/binman/etype/ ? Also, it will have a non-zero exit status still, but with a value of 101 which we check for and know that's "binary blob missing" and so OK to allow CI to pass on. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
