lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jan]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V4 0/3] scripts: dtc: Build fdtoverlay
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 09:42:21PM -0600, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 1/22/21 12:34 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:47:40AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> +David.
> >>
> >> On 19-01-21, 11:12, Frank Rowand wrote:
> >>> On 1/12/21 2:28 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >>>> We will start building overlays for platforms soon in the kernel and
> >>>> would need fdtoverlay tool going forward. Lets start fetching and
> >>>> building it.
> >>>>
> >>>> While at it, also remove fdtdump.c file, which isn't used by the kernel.
> >>>>
> >>>> V4:
> >>>> - Don't fetch and build fdtdump.c
> >>>> - Remove fdtdump.c
> >>>>
> >>>> Viresh Kumar (3):
> >>>> scripts: dtc: Add fdtoverlay.c to DTC_SOURCE
> >>>> scripts: dtc: Build fdtoverlay tool
> >>>> scripts: dtc: Remove the unused fdtdump.c file
> >>>>
> >>>> scripts/dtc/Makefile | 6 +-
> >>>> scripts/dtc/fdtdump.c | 163 -------------------------------
> >>>> scripts/dtc/update-dtc-source.sh | 6 +-
> >>>> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 167 deletions(-)
> >>>> delete mode 100644 scripts/dtc/fdtdump.c
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> My first inclination was to accept fdtoverlay, as is, from the upstream
> >>> project.
> >>>
> >>> But my experiences debugging use of fdtoverlay against the existing
> >>> unittest overlay files has me very wary of accepting fdtoverlay in
> >>> it's current form.
> >>>
> >>> As an exmple, adding an overlay that fails to reply results in the
> >>> following build messages:
> >>>
> >>> linux--5.11-rc> make zImage
> >>> make[1]: Entering directory '/local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/build/dragon_linus_5.11-rc'
> >>> GEN Makefile
> >>> CALL /local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/linux--5.11-rc/scripts/checksyscalls.sh
> >>> CALL /local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/linux--5.11-rc/scripts/atomic/check-atomics.sh
> >>> CHK include/generated/compile.h
> >>> FDTOVERLAY drivers/of/unittest-data/static_test.dtb
> >>>
> >>> Failed to apply 'drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay.dtb': FDT_ERR_NOTFOUND
> >>> make[4]: *** [/local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/linux--5.11-rc/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile:96: drivers/of/unittest-data/static_test.dtb] Error 1
> >>> make[3]: *** [/local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/linux--5.11-rc/scripts/Makefile.build:496: drivers/of/unittest-data] Error 2
> >>> make[2]: *** [/local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/linux--5.11-rc/scripts/Makefile.build:496: drivers/of] Error 2
> >>> make[1]: *** [/local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/linux--5.11-rc/Makefile:1805: drivers] Error 2
> >>> make[1]: Leaving directory '/local/frowand_nobackup/src/git_linus/build/dragon_linus_5.11-rc'
> >>> make: *** [Makefile:185: __sub-make] Error 2
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The specific error message (copied from above) is:
> >>>
> >>> Failed to apply 'drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay.dtb': FDT_ERR_NOTFOUND
> >>>
> >>> which is cryptic and does not even point to the location in the overlay that
> >>> is problematic. If you look at the source of fdtoverlay / libfdt, you will
> >>> find that FDT_ERR_NOTFOUND may be generated in one of many places.
> >>>
> >>> I do _not_ want to do a full review of fdtoverlay, but I think that it is
> >>> reasonable to request enhancing fdtoverlay in the parent project to generate
> >>> usable error messages before enabling fdtoverlay in the Linux kernel tree.
> >
>
> > That's... actually much harder than it sounds. fdtoverlay is
> > basically a trivial wrapper around the fdt_overlay_apply() function in
> > libfdt. Matching the conventions of the rest of the library, really
> > it's only way to report errors is a single error code.
> >
> > Returning richer errors is not an easy problem in a C library,
> > especially one designed to be usable in embedded systems, without an
> > allocator or much else available.
> >
> > Of course it would be possible to write a friendly command line tool
> > specifically for applying overlays, which could give better errors.
> > fdtoverlay as it stands isn't really that - it was pretty much written
> > just to invoke fdt_overlay_apply() in testcases.
>
> Thank you for providing that context.
>
> I do not know if there is a way to enable the code that is currently in libfdt
> to both be useful as an embedded library (for example, U-boot seems to often
> have a need to keep memory usage very small) and also be part of a tool with
> effective warning and error messages.

Yeah, I don't know either.

> Before having looked at libfdt only at a cursory level while debugging the proposed
> use of fdtoverlay in Linux, my first thought was that maybe it would be possible
> to add warning and error messages within "#ifdef" blocks, or other ways that
> cause the error code to _not_ be compiled as part of library version of libfdt,
> but only be compiled as part of fdtoverlay _when built in the Linux kernel_
> (noting that the proposed Linux patch builds the libfdt files as part of
> the fdtoverlay compile instead of as a discrete library). After looking at
> the libfdt source a tiny bit more carefully, I would probably shoot down this
> suggestion, as it makes the source code uglier and harder to understand and
> maintain for the primary purpose of being an embedded library.

Oof. That sounds really ugly, but maybe it could be pulled off.

> Do you have any thoughts on how warning and error messages could be added,
> or if it is even possible? Or maybe your suggestion of writing a "friendly
> command line tool specifically for applying overlays" is the path that
> Viresh should pursue?

I think at this stage it's a matter of trying a few approaches and
seeing what works out.

--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-01 05:42    [W:0.059 / U:2.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site