On 10/14/24 10:48, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 9:41 AM Jes Sorensen <jes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 10/11/24 18:46, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 9:05 AM Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Jes Sorensen <jes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> For Android it is common to use a prebuilt dtc, speficied via DTC=. In >>>> this case building dtc as part of the kernel is not necessary, and even >>>> unwanted to avoid mix and match between two different versions of dtc. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jes Sorensen <jes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> scripts/dtc/Makefile | 3 +++ >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> Well, this one is much simpler than a prior attempt[1] and may be >>> acceptable. But I wonder if something is not handled here. >>> >>> I think lack of external fdtoverlay support makes this incomplete. >> >> So I was thinking about that. The only places I see in the tree that >> reference fdtoverlay are scripts/make_fit.py, scripts/Makefile.dtbs, and >> scripts/dtc/Makefile. I don't see anything calling make_fit.py. > > "make dtbs" will use fdtoverlay if there are any base+overlay targets > which there are an increasing number of. > >> We can either exclude fdtoverlay from this, or assume that if one >> explicitly sets prebuilts, fdtoverlay is there too. > > Currently, if you set DTC you'll get external dtc plus in-tree > fdtoverlay. With your patch, you'll get external dtc plus a build > error because $(objtree)/scripts/dtc/fdtoverlay does not exist. > Neither case is ideal. Agree, what path calls fdtoverlay ? I didn't see anything calling that script. Thanks, Jes
