Re: [PATCH V11 3/5] kbuild: Allow .dtso format for overlay source files

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:47 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 10-03-21, 20:24, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:35 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.lib b/scripts/Makefile.lib
> > > index bc045a54a34e..59e86f67f9e0 100644
> > > --- a/scripts/Makefile.lib
> > > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.lib
> > > @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ $(obj)/%.dtb.S: $(obj)/%.dtb FORCE
> > >
> > >  quiet_cmd_dtc = DTC     $@
> > >  cmd_dtc = $(HOSTCC) -E $(dtc_cpp_flags) -x assembler-with-cpp -o $(dtc-tmp) $< ; \
> > > -       $(DTC) -O $(patsubst .%,%,$(suffix $@)) -o $@ -b 0 \
> > > +       $(DTC) -I dts -O $(patsubst .%,%,$(suffix $@)) -o $@ -b 0 \
> >
> > Even without "-I dts",
> >
> >    inform = guess_input_format(arg, "dts");
> >
> > seems to fall back to "dts" anyway,
>
> I missed this TBH.
>
> > but I guess you wanted to make this explicit, correct?
>
> That can be a reason now :)
>
> > I will drop the ugly -O.
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-kbuild/patch/20210310110824.782209-1-masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx/
>
> But if we are going to depend on DTC to guess it right, then we
> shouldn't add -I at all..
>
> > I will queue it to linux-kbuild/fixes.
> >
> >
> >
> > >                 $(addprefix -i,$(dir $<) $(DTC_INCLUDE)) $(DTC_FLAGS) \
> > >                 -d $(depfile).dtc.tmp $(dtc-tmp) ; \
> > >         cat $(depfile).pre.tmp $(depfile).dtc.tmp > $(depfile)
> > > @@ -347,9 +347,13 @@ cmd_dtc = $(HOSTCC) -E $(dtc_cpp_flags) -x assembler-with-cpp -o $(dtc-tmp) $< ;
> > >  $(obj)/%.dtb: $(src)/%.dts $(DTC) FORCE
> > >         $(call if_changed_dep,dtc)
> > >
> > > +# Required for of unit-test files as they can't be renamed to .dtso
> >
> > If you go with *.dtso, I think you will rename
> > all *.dts under the drivers/ directory.
> >
> > What is blocking you from making this consistent?
>
> The unit-test dts files are designed differently (we have had lots of
> discussion between Frank and David on that) and they aren't purely
> overlay or base files. They are designed to do some tricky testing and
> renaming them to .dtso won't be right, we are just reusing them to do
> static (build time) testing as well.


I still do not understand.

If they are not overlay files, why
do you need to have them suffixed with .dtbo?

".dts -> .dtb" should be enough.

Why do you need to do ".dts  -> .dtbo" ?




> I think it would be better if we can drop the existing %.dtbo rule
> here (i.e. dtbo from .dts) and do some magic in unit-test's Makefile,
> so it is localised at least instead of it here.
>
> Any ideas for that ?

I do not know.

My impression is you are doing something fishy.




-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada