Re: SOC_DIR not populated


Dan Kalowsky <dank@...>
 

Charles,

Thanks for the prompt response.  Do please keep me CC'd on this as I am not on the mailing list. 

Torsten the longer version might provide some background context for the debug.  Happy to help where I can.


On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:40 AM Cufi, Carles <Carles.Cufi@...> wrote:

Hi Dan,

 

Assuming you have the latest upstream master, then this might be a regression introduced by:

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/26715

 

We are certainly not dropping support for out-of-tree SoCs, in fact we just discussed this recently with Torsten (on copy). He should be able to give more info on the subject.

 

Thanks,

 

Carles

 

From: devel@... <devel@...> On Behalf Of Dan Kalowsky via lists.zephyrproject.org
Sent: 06 August 2020 19:19
To: devel@...
Subject: [Zephyr-devel] SOC_DIR not populated

 

Hey Zephyr team,

 

Long time no talk.

 

Short version:  Using the latest HEAD, I am finding that the kconfig SOC_DIR is not being populated for an out of tree SOC build.  This causes a compilation failure and makes everyone a sad panda.  As this was something that worked perfectly in 2.3 (and for the most part earlier), I was a little surprised to see this no longer working on HEAD.  Was it intentional to remove support for out of tree SOCs, or is this an oversight?  I could not find any documentation supporting either statement in the mailing list or meeting minutes.

 

Longer version:

 

I have a Zephyr application with a lot of out of tree pieces.  It kind of looks like the following simplified layout:

 

application/

- board/

- soc/

-- Kconfig

-- arm/

--- product/

--- Kconfig

--- Kconfig.defconfig

--- Kconfig.soc

--- CMakeLists.txt

---- soc_a/

---- soc_b/

- dts/

- src/

zephyr/

modules/

 

Overall this has worked great in 2.3 (and was functional in 2.2 with some fixes).  Given some of the recent work by Andrew and Tomasz (thanks and hi btw) I was motivated to upgrade to HEAD.  At this point, while building I get informed that the path $(SOC_DIR)/$(ARCH) has some unset variables, which causes the initial setup for cmake/kconfig to fail.  Sure enough, there are empty variables being used.  While investigating, it looks like the current HEAD has three issues for out of tree SOC usage, but I've only been able to "resolve" two of them.  Almost all of it seems to have originated from commit 5f7cc8ded9138b773012b9ffedc744b9475927db.

 

Issues found:

1) The file cmake/kconfig.cmake no longer sets up to export the SOC_DIR as it used to.  Thus when setting a custom SOC_DIR, nothing is there for the python script to add.  Adding back lines 44 and 88 solves the variables now being set, although the value of SOC_DIR is still nil.  You will need to resolve issue 2 as well to finish this fix.

 

2) The file cmake/app/boilerplate.cmake has relocated lines of code that set the SOC_DIR variable to a after a section of code that has requirements for them to be set.  Specifically the chunk at 527-541 needs to happen BEFORE the inclusion of kconfig.cmake on line 515.  It is not clear why these lines were moved from the commit or Pull Request, but it does expose a dependency chain that does not seem to be tested/validated in the scripts.  Moving this section alone is not enough, you still need issue 1 resolved for the variables to show up in the kconfig.py script.

 

3) Even with these changes, which allow me to get further along the compile, there is still one last issue I have not been able to rootcause.   I end up seeing the following error, which appears to munge some of the path:

CMake Error at /home/dkalowsky/product_dev/zephyr/CMakeLists.txt:376 (message):
  Could not find linker script:
  '/home/dkalowsky/product_dev/application/soc/arm//linker.ld'.

 

Note the // before linker.ld. 

 

Which brings us to the questions part...

 

Is Zephyr looking to drop out of tree SOC?  I certainly hope not, but some of the change directions in the commit above give a bit of concern that it might be true.  Note this is tea leaf reading, and I am bad at it.

If not, is there a new layout that should be utilized for out of tree SOC usage?  The documentation still points to the previously existing behavior as being correct.  If it is changing, is there a document that I can reference to update my local application?

If this is all oversight and just bugs, any ideas on what could be causing issue 3?

 

 


--

"Do you expect me to talk?"
"No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die."



--
"Do you expect me to talk?"
"No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die."

Join devel@lists.zephyrproject.org to automatically receive all group messages.