Arnd Bergmann arnd@arndb.de writes:
On Thursday, July 7, 2016 10:43:23 AM CEST Alexandre Belloni wrote:
On 07/07/2016 at 10:07:44 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
On Thursday, July 7, 2016 9:32:08 AM CEST Alexandre Belloni wrote:
On 06/07/2016 at 15:17:14 -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote :
multi_v4t_defconfig: at91sam9261ek: 1 failed lab at91sam9m10g45ek: 1 failed lab at91sam9x25ek: 1 failed lab at91sam9x35ek: 1 failed labWell, it would have been useful to be in copy of the patch adding that configuration. It will never boot on those SoCs so this can be ignored.
I added the patch, but I don't know why kernelci decided to try booting it on those platforms. I guess we don't even have anyone with rm9200 machines for kernelci, or interest in adding that, right?
An at91rm9200ek should be up in our lab soon. For what I understand, the main issue is getting an armv4 rootfs from kci and it also has to boot over nfs instead of initramfs because of the limited RAM space.
Ok, good to know.
Once that is added, I guess we have the opposite problem with kernelci running multi_v5_defconfig on rm9200.
While I don't know what code implements it, I guess there is something that currently matches CONFIG_ARCH_AT91 to booting on all at91sam9 boards, and we have to replace that with CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9, and add a similar trigger to boot on rm9200 when CONFIG_SOC_AT91RM9200 is set.
Well, by default, kernel CI will try to boot boards if it finds a DTB built for that build, but we do have support for blacklisting.
But...
IMO, the much better fix is for the kernel build not to build DTBs that can't possibly boot for that defconfig in the first place. That way other automated build infrastrucutre doesn't have to duplicate the kernelCI blacklisting.
I see mach-at91/Kconfig alrady has CONFIG_SOC_SAM_V7 and CONFIG_SOC_SAM_V4_V5, and those are already used in arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile to select which DTs are actually compiled.
IMO, that approach should be expanded so that the DT files are not created for builds that can't possibly boot them.
Kevin