Open msgilligan opened 1 month ago
I tried with the 4.2.0
tag and got the same error(s).
I can confirm the same build error on Ubuntu 22.04.4 ARM64.
Upgrading TF-A to v2.10 fixes the build error. I haven't tried booting it though.
I'm going to give it a try today. I'm trying to figure out how to configure repo
to do this. Should we make a PR to the manifest
repo?
I made a PR: https://github.com/OP-TEE/manifest/pull/287
Upgrading TF-A to v2.10 fixes the build error.
Were you able to run with the flash
target, or did you use the boot-img
target?
Am I missing something here. Should we update the documentation?
(Update: The behavior I am seeing is that the flash
target requires the boot-img
target but without specifying it as make dependency.)
I copied the rockpi4.img
built to an SD Card and it boots and successfully runs xtest
.
(Since I'm using a VM I'm not so sure I want to try to to use USB pass thru to write to eMMC)
https://github.com/OP-TEE/manifest/pull/287 is ready-for-review.
Upgrading TF-A to v2.10 fixes the build error.
Were you able to run with the
flash
target, or did you use theboot-img
target?Am I missing something here. Should we update the documentation?
(Update: The behavior I am seeing is that the
flash
target requires theboot-img
target but without specifying it as make dependency.)
I always do a make all
first, step 5 [1] says make -j nproc
which is equivalent. We don't want flash to depend on the all
target since it's a bit much to do each time you're flashing.
However, if you see a good place to make it clearer when building for rockpi4 feel free to propose something.
[1] https://optee.readthedocs.io/en/latest/building/gits/build.html#step-5-build-the-solution
I always do a
make all
first, step 5 [1] says make -jnproc
which is equivalent. We don't want flash to depend on theall
target since it's a bit much to do each time you're flashing.
OK, that makes sense.
But developers (like me) might assume that to just do the flash they can just use the flash
target. And in the case of incremental builds they may not want to run the all
target.
However, if you see a good place to make it clearer when building for rockpi4 feel free to propose something.
I have not studied the Makefile, but I can think of two approaches:
flash
target depend on boot-img
(this may not be much different from all
, I suppose)As I learn more about the build, I might come up with a better idea, but it seems we should at least do #2 for now.
BTW, I have two Rock 4 family boards for testing:
And have now successfully booted and run xtest
on both of them.
@jenswi-linaro I'm also wondering if we should have used the lts-v2.10.5 tag since that's the latest (LTS) release?
@jenswi-linaro I'm also wondering if we should have used the lts-v2.10.5 tag since that's the latest (LTS) release?
I'd rather upgrade to the latest TF-A release. That's what we usually do when upgrading. I suggested v2.10 because I knew it was used in other configurations and wanted to minimize the risk of problems just before the release.
But developers (like me) might assume that to just do the flash they can just use the
flash
target. And in the case of incremental builds they may not want to run theall
target.
Other developers (like me) might assume that flash
only does the flashing and nothing else. Right now we get a bit of both. Perhaps we should let flash
depend on all
and add a flash-only
target depending on nothing.
Perhaps we should let
flash
depend onall
and add aflash-only
target depending on nothing.
That sounds like a good idea! Making that change and documenting it would do the trick. Would we need to change any of the makefiles for the other boards?
Would we need to change any of the makefiles for the other boards?
Yes. Before starting this I'd like to hear what others think. @jforissier @jbech-linaro @etienne-lms ?
Would we need to change any of the makefiles for the other boards?
Yes. Before starting this I'd like to hear what others think. @jforissier @jbech-linaro @etienne-lms ?
Sounds good to me.
Building with the latest
master
(on Debian 12 ARM64), Using the standard build instructions, I get the following:When I try using the
boot-img
target, I get:I will try on an Intel box shortly and see if that makes a difference.
Note that I made a PR with some documentation improvements for rockpi4: https://github.com/OP-TEE/optee_docs/pull/242