From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:27:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:27:33 -0500 Received: from are.twiddle.net ([64.81.246.98]:898 "EHLO are.twiddle.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:27:32 -0500 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:35:39 -0800 From: Richard Henderson To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [CFT] arch/alpha: Makefiles update Message-ID: <20021231153539.A21946@twiddle.net> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20021230115336.GA1089@mars.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20021230115336.GA1089@mars.ravnborg.org>; from sam@ravnborg.org on Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 12:53:36PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 12:53:36PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > +# If ALPHA_GENERIC, make sure to turn off any instruction set extensions > +# that the host compiler might have on by default. Given that EV4 and EV5 > +# have the same instruction set, prefer EV5 because an EV5 schedule is > +# more likely to keep an EV4 processor busy than vice-versa. > + > +# Default value > +mach-yy := ev56 > +mach-$(have_mcpu_pca56)$(have_mcpu_pca56) := pca56 > + > +#Machine depedent values, influenced by gcc capabilitites > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_SX164)$(have_mcpu_pca56) := pca56 > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_POLARIS)$(have_mcpu_pca56) := pca56 > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_EV67)$(have_mcpu_ev67) := ev67 > + > +mach-y := $(mach-yy) > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_GENERIC) := ev5 > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_EV4) := ev4 > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_EV56) := ev56 > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_EV5) := ev5 > +mach-$(CONFIG_ALPHA_EV6) := ev6 This doesn't work. For example CONFIG_ALPHA_EV67 depends on CONFIG_ALPHA_EV6, so we'll never use the -mcpu=ev67 flag. I'm reverting this part. I see nothing wrong with an if/else tree for this. It's straightforward. I think anything you come up with to replace it will be harder to understand at a glance, and therefore more fragile. > +# My special boot (msb) writes directly to a specific disk partition, > +# I doubt most people will want to do that without changes.. > +msb srmboot: vmlinux > + $(Q)$(MAKE) -f scripts/Makefile.build obj=$(boot) $@ I've just removed these targets. I'm testing the rest of the patch now. Will apply if successful. r~