[meta-ti] [PATCH] beaglebone.conf: temporarily use generic am335x_evm_config for U-boot

[Khem Raj]

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:37 PM Denys Dmytriyenko <denys at ti.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:27:19PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM Denys Dmytriyenko <denys at ti.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Yeah I saw that but this patch is not their in 2018.01 release that TI
> > > > > fork
> > > > > > is based on regardless I backported this patch to this version it did not
> > > > > > bring the size below mark
> > > > > > I think it’s because we are using hardened toolchain and that enalbles
> > > > > > extra options to enable pie and ssp since these options get added to CC
> > > > > > they get passed into uboot straight
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we should just disable security flags for u boot in OE and may be
> > > > > > uboot make system should append fno-pie fno-stack-protector to nullify
> > > > > > these options
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, do you want to submit a patch for that or should I do one and just
> > > > > Suggested-by you?  Thanks!
> > > >
> > > >Yes, that's right.
> > > > This would not be acceptable change since it changes how we build gcc
> > > > itself secondly it does not happen for master uboot
> > > >
> > > > However if this works then we need to understand why it increas e the size
> > >
> > > Even if this change is not acceptable upstream, I would prefer it locally in
> > > meta-ti recipe, instead of disabling more features to free up 5-6KB in SPL.
> >
> > this is a distro level change. meta-ti is not appropriate place to decide that
>
> Are we talking about passing fno-pie and fno-stack-protector to U-boot build
> that you suggested above? That is what I'm referring here. It can be BBB
> specific patch. That is until we figure out why it grows code so much...
>
oh I confused it with GCCPIE

> --
> Denys