[RFC PATCH v1] powerpc: Add version to install filenames

Michael Ellerman mpe at ellerman.id.au
Wed Mar 15 12:54:09 AEDT 2023


Nick Child <nnac123 at linux.ibm.com> writes:
> Rather than replacing the versionless vmlinux and System.map files,
> copy to files with the version info appended.
>
> Additionally, since executing the script is a last resort option,
> inform the user about the missing `installkernel` command and the
> location of the installation.
>
> This work is adapted from `arch/s390/boot/install.sh`.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Child <nnac123 at linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> Hoping I am not breaking someones dependency on targeting /boot/vmlinux
> so RFC'ing.

It will probably break *someone*'s workflow :)

> I typically have kernelinstall on my LPARs and installing and rebooting
> goes peacefully.
>
> Recently, I did not have kernelinstall and `make install` seemed to behave
> differently. I got very little output but a succeful return code. After
> initramfs issues during boot I dug into the makefiles a bit to figure out
> where execution was differing. When `kernelinstall` cannot be found, we
> invoke `arch/powerpc/boot/install.sh` instead. I am primarily interested
> in getting more information relayed to the user about what is going on.
>
> The changes to installing with the version appended are more of an afterthought
> that makes sense to me but could understand why someone may depend on consistent
> filenames.
>
> Opening as RFC for opinions/rejections/concerns.

TIL arch/powerpc/boot/install.sh even exists :)

I generally netboot kernels, so I don't really use `make install` that
much. But I know some folks do, though they probably have
`installkernel` installed as a rule.

Still this change seems sensible, and putting the version in the file
names matches what arm, s390, arm64 and riscv do.

See if anyone else has an opinion.

cheers


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list