On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 09:20:26PM -0500, Jon Humphreys wrote:
Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com writes:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 04:28:16PM -0500, Jonathan Humphreys wrote:
Fill in the BeaglePlay's capsule GUID properties of the base binman capsule nodes.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Humphreys j-humphreys@ti.com
arch/arm/dts/k3-am625-beagleplay-u-boot.dtsi | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/dts/k3-am625-r5-beagleplay.dts | 15 +++++++++++ 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+)
This series introduces failure to build in CI, and it's a little tricky to replicate locally, depending on your environment. You first need to NOT have BINMAN_INDIRS set and instead be using fake binaries. Second, it seems python version dependent perhaps? I don't see this on my host, but by:
- Using the CI container
- Setting up a virtualenv inside of it
- pip install -r tools/buildman/requirements.txt
I get: $ ./tools/buildman/buildman --keep-outputs --reproducible-builds -dvel --force-build -PEWM --output /tmp/am62x_beagleplay_r5 --board am62x_beagleplay_r5 Building current source for 1 boards (1 thread, 12 jobs per thread) arm: + am62x_beagleplay_r5 +(am62x_beagleplay_r5) Image 'tiboot3-am62x-gp-evm.bin' is missing optional external blobs but is still functional: ti-fs-gp.bin +(am62x_beagleplay_r5) +(am62x_beagleplay_r5) /binman/tiboot3-am62x-gp-evm.bin/ti-fs-gp.bin (ti-sysfw/ti-fs-firmware-am62x-gp.bin): +(am62x_beagleplay_r5) Missing blob +(am62x_beagleplay_r5) binman: object of type 'NoneType' has no len() +(am62x_beagleplay_r5) make[1]: *** [Makefile:1126: .binman_stamp] Error 1 +(am62x_beagleplay_r5) make: *** [Makefile:177: sub-make] Error 2 0 0 1 /1 am62x_beagleplay_r5
Tom, this is failing in the CI container because the container is missing the mkeficapsule tool.
To solve this, we just need to add it to the CI container.
My understanding of binman's handling of missing bintools is that it should gracefully continue with fake data, so that buildman can successfully test out builds for boards even when you don't have all the required bintools. If I have that correct, I can also create a patch to properly handle this when using mkeficapsule. But I want to verify this is the desired behavior, since mkeficapsule isn't a unique or vendor specific tool, so shouldn't we require it as part of the U-Boot build environment and err out if it is missing?
Perhaps it's a binman issue since we build mkeficapsule or at least should be? Neha?