* [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
@ 2013-05-02 23:17 Julien Grall
2013-05-03 7:15 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Julien Grall @ 2013-05-02 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel; +Cc: Julien Grall, ian.jackson, ian.campbell, patches
The commit 3378685 "Add conditional build of subsystems to configure.ac"
allows the user to disable/enable some components of Xen. After this commit
some targets are still called on every subsystems.
For Xen on ARM, the makefile targets build, clean and distclean will failed.
Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
---
Makefile | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 32efb70..2217c20 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -10,6 +10,9 @@ all: dist
SUBSYSTEMS?=xen kernels tools stubdom docs
TARGS_DIST=$(patsubst %, dist-%, $(SUBSYSTEMS))
TARGS_INSTALL=$(patsubst %, install-%, $(SUBSYSTEMS))
+TARGS_BUILD=$(patsubst %, install-%, $(SUBSYSTEMS))
+TARGS_CLEAN=$(patsubst %, clean-%, $(SUBSYSTEMS))
+TARGS_DISTCLEAN=$(patsubst %, distclean-%, $(SUBSYSTEMS))
export XEN_ROOT=$(CURDIR)
include Config.mk
@@ -23,15 +26,28 @@ include buildconfigs/Rules.mk
install: $(TARGS_INSTALL)
.PHONY: build
-build: kernels
+build: $(TARGS_BUILD)
+
+.PHONY: build-xen
+build-xen:
$(MAKE) -C xen build
+
+.PHONY: build-tools
+build-tools:
$(MAKE) -C tools build
+
+.PHONY: build-stubdom
$(MAKE) -C stubdom build
ifeq (x86_64,$(XEN_TARGET_ARCH))
XEN_TARGET_ARCH=x86_32 $(MAKE) -C stubdom pv-grub
endif
+
+.PHONY: build-docs
+build-docs:
$(MAKE) -C docs build
+build-kernels: kernels
+
# The test target is for unit tests that can run without an installation. Of
# course, many tests require a machine running Xen itself, and these are
# handled elsewhere.
@@ -146,30 +162,59 @@ debball: dist
# clean doesn't do a kclean
.PHONY: clean
-clean::
+clean:: $(TARGS_CLEAN)
+
+.PHONY: clean-xen
+clean-xen:
$(MAKE) -C xen clean
+
+.PHONY: clean-tools
+clean-tools:
$(MAKE) -C tools clean
+
+.PHONY: clean-stubdom
+clean-stubdom:
$(MAKE) -C stubdom crossclean
ifeq (x86_64,$(XEN_TARGET_ARCH))
XEN_TARGET_ARCH=x86_32 $(MAKE) -C stubdom crossclean
endif
+
+.PHONY: clean-docs
+clean-docs:
$(MAKE) -C docs clean
+clean-%:
+ @: # do nothing
+
# clean, but blow away kernel build tree plus tarballs
.PHONY: distclean
-distclean:
+distclean: $(TARGS_DISTCLEAN)
-rm config/Toplevel.mk
+ rm -rf dist patches/tmp
+ rm -rf patches/*/.makedep
+ rm -rf config.log config.status config.cache autom4te.cache
+
+.PHONY: distclean-xen
+distclean-xen:
$(MAKE) -C xen distclean
+
+.PHONY: distclean-tools
+tools-distclean:
$(MAKE) -C tools distclean
+
+.PHONY: distclean-stubdom
+distclean-stubdom:
$(MAKE) -C stubdom distclean
ifeq (x86_64,$(XEN_TARGET_ARCH))
XEN_TARGET_ARCH=x86_32 $(MAKE) -C stubdom distclean
endif
+
+.PHONY: distclean-docs
+distclean-docs:
$(MAKE) -C docs distclean
- rm -rf dist patches/tmp
+
+distclean-kernels:
for i in $(ALLKERNELS) ; do $(MAKE) $$i-delete ; done
- rm -rf patches/*/.makedep
- rm -rf config.log config.status config.cache autom4te.cache
# Linux name for GNU distclean
.PHONY: mrproper
--
1.7.10.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-02 23:17 [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems Julien Grall
@ 2013-05-03 7:15 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-03 8:43 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2013-05-03 7:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julien Grall; +Cc: xen-devel, ian.jackson, ian.campbell, patches
>>> On 03.05.13 at 01:17, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
> The commit 3378685 "Add conditional build of subsystems to configure.ac"
> allows the user to disable/enable some components of Xen. After this commit
> some targets are still called on every subsystems.
For build this is correct to do, but for any clean target it isn't - clean
should remove leftovers from earlier builds even if there was an
intermediate reconfigure.
> For Xen on ARM, the makefile targets build, clean and distclean will failed.
If they fail, this will need fixing elsewhere then.
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-03 7:15 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2013-05-03 8:43 ` Ian Campbell
2013-05-03 9:53 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-05-03 8:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Ian Jackson,
patches@linaro.org
On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 08:15 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 03.05.13 at 01:17, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
> > The commit 3378685 "Add conditional build of subsystems to configure.ac"
> > allows the user to disable/enable some components of Xen. After this commit
> > some targets are still called on every subsystems.
>
> For build this is correct to do, but for any clean target it isn't - clean
> should remove leftovers from earlier builds even if there was an
> intermediate reconfigure.
Yes, I think so too.
> > For Xen on ARM, the makefile targets build, clean and distclean will failed.
>
> If they fail, this will need fixing elsewhere then.
Part of the issue is that there are targets which are simply not ported
to ARM and therefore are missing bits of infrastructure , e.g. mini-os
where one if the clean failures is lack of
extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk.
However I think it is wrong to tie the clean/distclean of these into the
configurey selection mechanism, i.e. mini-os should know that it only
support x86 (for the minute) and DTRT when called for ARM (which is
likely to be nothing much). Perhaps a stub
extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk is the answer?
The other case is the kernel distclean, which fails with
buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common:32: buildconfigs/src.: No such file or directory
but that seems to fail on x86 too. Having disabled it by default so long
ago perhaps the time has come to simply remove this stuff? I don't know
if anyone is still using it -- the test system perhaps?
Or it could be fixed with the below, I think.
Ian.
8<---------------------
build: fix kernel build rules.
Rename mk.linux-2.6-common to common.linux-2.6 so that it does not get
included in the ALLKERNELS logic.
Specify XEN_LINUX_SOURCE for linux-2.6-native, looking at 414614d84e67
and todays linux-2.6-xen.mk I am guessing that hg-clone of the 2.6.18
tree is the expected method. To be honest I didn't even try it...
Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
---
NB git diff -M style diff, includes the rename...
.../{mk.linux-2.6-common => common.linux-2.6} | 0
buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 | 2 +-
buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native | 3 ++-
buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops | 2 +-
buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest | 2 +-
buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen | 2 +-
6 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-03 8:43 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2013-05-03 9:53 ` Ian Campbell
2013-05-03 10:52 ` Julien Grall
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-05-03 9:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich
Cc: Julien Grall, Ian Jackson, patches@linaro.org,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org
On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 09:43 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 08:15 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 03.05.13 at 01:17, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > The commit 3378685 "Add conditional build of subsystems to configure.ac"
> > > allows the user to disable/enable some components of Xen. After this commit
> > > some targets are still called on every subsystems.
> >
> > For build this is correct to do, but for any clean target it isn't - clean
> > should remove leftovers from earlier builds even if there was an
> > intermediate reconfigure.
>
> Yes, I think so too.
>
> > > For Xen on ARM, the makefile targets build, clean and distclean will failed.
> >
> > If they fail, this will need fixing elsewhere then.
>
> Part of the issue is that there are targets which are simply not ported
> to ARM and therefore are missing bits of infrastructure , e.g. mini-os
> where one if the clean failures is lack of
> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk.
>
> However I think it is wrong to tie the clean/distclean of these into the
> configurey selection mechanism, i.e. mini-os should know that it only
> support x86 (for the minute) and DTRT when called for ARM (which is
> likely to be nothing much). Perhaps a stub
> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk is the answer?
>
> The other case is the kernel distclean, which fails with
> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common:32: buildconfigs/src.: No such file or directory
> but that seems to fail on x86 too. Having disabled it by default so long
> ago perhaps the time has come to simply remove this stuff? I don't know
> if anyone is still using it -- the test system perhaps?
>
> Or it could be fixed with the below, I think.
>
> Ian.
>
> 8<---------------------
>
> build: fix kernel build rules.
>
> Rename mk.linux-2.6-common to common.linux-2.6 so that it does not get
> included in the ALLKERNELS logic.
>
> Specify XEN_LINUX_SOURCE for linux-2.6-native, looking at 414614d84e67
> and todays linux-2.6-xen.mk I am guessing that hg-clone of the 2.6.18
> tree is the expected method. To be honest I didn't even try it...
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> ---
> NB git diff -M style diff, includes the rename...
>
> .../{mk.linux-2.6-common => common.linux-2.6} | 0
> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 | 2 +-
> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native | 3 ++-
> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops | 2 +-
> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest | 2 +-
> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen | 2 +-
> 6 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Ahem....
8<----------------
diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common b/buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
similarity index 100%
rename from buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
rename to buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
index 6b8d989..6523afb 100644
--- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
+++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
@@ -7,4 +7,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_CONFIG_UPDATE := buildconfigs/enable-xen-config
EXTRAVERSION ?=
-include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
+include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
index c7c0949..6e2a77b 100644
--- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
+++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
EXTRAVERSION = -native
IMAGE_TARGET = bzImage
INSTALL_BOOT_PATH = $(DESTDIR)/boot
+LINUX_VER ?= 2.6.18
+XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
-include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
+include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
index 59cae79..9a11c7d 100644
--- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
+++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
@@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= xen/stable-2.6.32.x
EXTRAVERSION ?=
-include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
+include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
index 2a0b9af..158dda0 100644
--- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
+++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
@@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= auto-latest
EXTRAVERSION ?=
-include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
+include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
index 8594b55..b1facb6 100644
--- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
+++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
@@ -3,4 +3,4 @@ LINUX_VER ?= 2.6.18
XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
-include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
+include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-03 9:53 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2013-05-03 10:52 ` Julien Grall
2013-05-03 11:13 ` Andrew Cooper
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Julien Grall @ 2013-05-03 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Ian Jackson, Jan Beulich,
patches@linaro.org
On 05/03/2013 10:53 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 09:43 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 08:15 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 03.05.13 at 01:17, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> The commit 3378685 "Add conditional build of subsystems to configure.ac"
>>>> allows the user to disable/enable some components of Xen. After this commit
>>>> some targets are still called on every subsystems.
>>>
>>> For build this is correct to do, but for any clean target it isn't - clean
>>> should remove leftovers from earlier builds even if there was an
>>> intermediate reconfigure.
>>
>> Yes, I think so too.
>>
>>>> For Xen on ARM, the makefile targets build, clean and distclean will failed.
>>>
>>> If they fail, this will need fixing elsewhere then.
>>
>> Part of the issue is that there are targets which are simply not ported
>> to ARM and therefore are missing bits of infrastructure , e.g. mini-os
>> where one if the clean failures is lack of
>> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk.
>>
>> However I think it is wrong to tie the clean/distclean of these into the
>> configurey selection mechanism, i.e. mini-os should know that it only
>> support x86 (for the minute) and DTRT when called for ARM (which is
>> likely to be nothing much). Perhaps a stub
>> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk is the answer?
>>
>> The other case is the kernel distclean, which fails with
>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common:32: buildconfigs/src.: No such file or directory
>> but that seems to fail on x86 too. Having disabled it by default so long
>> ago perhaps the time has come to simply remove this stuff? I don't know
>> if anyone is still using it -- the test system perhaps?
>>
>> Or it could be fixed with the below, I think.
>>
>> Ian.
>>
>> 8<---------------------
>>
>> build: fix kernel build rules.
>>
>> Rename mk.linux-2.6-common to common.linux-2.6 so that it does not get
>> included in the ALLKERNELS logic.
>>
>> Specify XEN_LINUX_SOURCE for linux-2.6-native, looking at 414614d84e67
>> and todays linux-2.6-xen.mk I am guessing that hg-clone of the 2.6.18
>> tree is the expected method. To be honest I didn't even try it...
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
>> ---
>> NB git diff -M style diff, includes the rename...
>>
>> .../{mk.linux-2.6-common => common.linux-2.6} | 0
>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 | 2 +-
>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native | 3 ++-
>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops | 2 +-
>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest | 2 +-
>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen | 2 +-
>> 6 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> Ahem....
>
> 8<----------------
>
> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common b/buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
> similarity index 100%
> rename from buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
> rename to buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
> index 6b8d989..6523afb 100644
> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
> @@ -7,4 +7,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_CONFIG_UPDATE := buildconfigs/enable-xen-config
>
> EXTRAVERSION ?=
>
> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
> index c7c0949..6e2a77b 100644
> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
> EXTRAVERSION = -native
> IMAGE_TARGET = bzImage
> INSTALL_BOOT_PATH = $(DESTDIR)/boot
> +LINUX_VER ?= 2.6.18
> +XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
>
> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
> index 59cae79..9a11c7d 100644
> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
> @@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= xen/stable-2.6.32.x
>
> EXTRAVERSION ?=
>
> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
> index 2a0b9af..158dda0 100644
> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
> @@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= auto-latest
>
> EXTRAVERSION ?=
>
> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
> index 8594b55..b1facb6 100644
> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
> @@ -3,4 +3,4 @@ LINUX_VER ?= 2.6.18
>
> XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
>
> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
Hum in fact, it seems the build target doesn't work because
make[3]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/arch/arm'
gzip -f -9 < /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen > /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz.new
mv /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz.new /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz
make[2]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen'
make[1]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen'
make -C tools build
make[1]: Entering directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/tools'
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `build'. Stop.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/tools'
make: *** [build] Error 2
The target build is missing in tools build. So I guess nobody use it now.
Is it possible to remove this target?
--
Julien
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-03 10:52 ` Julien Grall
@ 2013-05-03 11:13 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-07 17:27 ` Ian Jackson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2013-05-03 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julien Grall
Cc: Ian Campbell, patches@linaro.org, Julien Grall, Ian Jackson,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Jan Beulich
On 03/05/2013 11:52, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 05/03/2013 10:53 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 09:43 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 08:15 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03.05.13 at 01:17, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>> The commit 3378685 "Add conditional build of subsystems to configure.ac"
>>>>> allows the user to disable/enable some components of Xen. After this commit
>>>>> some targets are still called on every subsystems.
>>>> For build this is correct to do, but for any clean target it isn't - clean
>>>> should remove leftovers from earlier builds even if there was an
>>>> intermediate reconfigure.
>>> Yes, I think so too.
>>>
>>>>> For Xen on ARM, the makefile targets build, clean and distclean will failed.
>>>> If they fail, this will need fixing elsewhere then.
>>> Part of the issue is that there are targets which are simply not ported
>>> to ARM and therefore are missing bits of infrastructure , e.g. mini-os
>>> where one if the clean failures is lack of
>>> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk.
>>>
>>> However I think it is wrong to tie the clean/distclean of these into the
>>> configurey selection mechanism, i.e. mini-os should know that it only
>>> support x86 (for the minute) and DTRT when called for ARM (which is
>>> likely to be nothing much). Perhaps a stub
>>> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk is the answer?
>>>
>>> The other case is the kernel distclean, which fails with
>>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common:32: buildconfigs/src.: No such file or directory
>>> but that seems to fail on x86 too. Having disabled it by default so long
>>> ago perhaps the time has come to simply remove this stuff? I don't know
>>> if anyone is still using it -- the test system perhaps?
>>>
>>> Or it could be fixed with the below, I think.
>>>
>>> Ian.
>>>
>>> 8<---------------------
>>>
>>> build: fix kernel build rules.
>>>
>>> Rename mk.linux-2.6-common to common.linux-2.6 so that it does not get
>>> included in the ALLKERNELS logic.
>>>
>>> Specify XEN_LINUX_SOURCE for linux-2.6-native, looking at 414614d84e67
>>> and todays linux-2.6-xen.mk I am guessing that hg-clone of the 2.6.18
>>> tree is the expected method. To be honest I didn't even try it...
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
>>> ---
>>> NB git diff -M style diff, includes the rename...
>>>
>>> .../{mk.linux-2.6-common => common.linux-2.6} | 0
>>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 | 2 +-
>>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native | 3 ++-
>>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops | 2 +-
>>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest | 2 +-
>>> buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen | 2 +-
>>> 6 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> Ahem....
>>
>> 8<----------------
>>
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common b/buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> similarity index 100%
>> rename from buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> rename to buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
>> index 6b8d989..6523afb 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
>> @@ -7,4 +7,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_CONFIG_UPDATE := buildconfigs/enable-xen-config
>>
>> EXTRAVERSION ?=
>>
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
>> index c7c0949..6e2a77b 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
>> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
>> EXTRAVERSION = -native
>> IMAGE_TARGET = bzImage
>> INSTALL_BOOT_PATH = $(DESTDIR)/boot
>> +LINUX_VER ?= 2.6.18
>> +XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
>>
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
>> index 59cae79..9a11c7d 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
>> @@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= xen/stable-2.6.32.x
>>
>> EXTRAVERSION ?=
>>
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
>> index 2a0b9af..158dda0 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
>> @@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= auto-latest
>>
>> EXTRAVERSION ?=
>>
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
>> index 8594b55..b1facb6 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
>> @@ -3,4 +3,4 @@ LINUX_VER ?= 2.6.18
>>
>> XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
>>
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>
> Hum in fact, it seems the build target doesn't work because
>
> make[3]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/arch/arm'
> gzip -f -9 < /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen > /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz.new
> mv /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz.new /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen'
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen'
> make -C tools build
> make[1]: Entering directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/tools'
> make[1]: *** No rule to make target `build'. Stop.
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/tools'
> make: *** [build] Error 2
>
> The target build is missing in tools build. So I guess nobody use it now.
> Is it possible to remove this target?
>
I did attempt to fix this before with
http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
Please allow this to constitute a "ping" regarding the patch on that email.
~Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-03 11:13 ` Andrew Cooper
@ 2013-05-07 17:27 ` Ian Jackson
2013-05-08 10:22 ` George Dunlap
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Jackson @ 2013-05-07 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper, George Dunlap
Cc: Ian Campbell, patches@linaro.org, Julien Grall,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Jan Beulich
Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
> I did attempt to fix this before with
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
>
> Please allow this to constitute a "ping" regarding the patch on that email.
We had a little thread about this then.
At the time I thought we also needed this patch, before yours:
http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
It looks from that thread like I was hoping for an ack from someone
else on my patch.
These look like bugfixes to me. George, are they OK for 4.3 ?
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-07 17:27 ` Ian Jackson
@ 2013-05-08 10:22 ` George Dunlap
2013-05-08 11:18 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: George Dunlap @ 2013-05-08 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Jackson
Cc: Ian Campbell, patches@linaro.org, Andrew Cooper, Julien Grall,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Jan Beulich
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
>> I did attempt to fix this before with
>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
>>
>> Please allow this to constitute a "ping" regarding the patch on that email.
>
> We had a little thread about this then.
>
> At the time I thought we also needed this patch, before yours:
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
>
> It looks from that thread like I was hoping for an ack from someone
> else on my patch.
>
> These look like bugfixes to me. George, are they OK for 4.3 ?
Hrm, I'm not terribly happy about this kind of change this late in the
day, but I think overall it's best to fix this.
Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-08 10:22 ` George Dunlap
@ 2013-05-08 11:18 ` Ian Campbell
2013-05-08 12:14 ` Andrew Cooper
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-05-08 11:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: George Dunlap
Cc: patches@linaro.org, Andrew Cooper, Julien Grall, Ian Jackson,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Jan Beulich
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 11:22 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
> >> I did attempt to fix this before with
> >> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
> >>
> >> Please allow this to constitute a "ping" regarding the patch on that email.
> >
> > We had a little thread about this then.
> >
> > At the time I thought we also needed this patch, before yours:
> > http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
> >
> > It looks from that thread like I was hoping for an ack from someone
> > else on my patch.
> >
> > These look like bugfixes to me. George, are they OK for 4.3 ?
>
> Hrm, I'm not terribly happy about this kind of change this late in the
> day, but I think overall it's best to fix this.
>
> Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
This old mail is long gone from my INBOX, can I get either a resend or a
set of message ids which I can track down?
Also can you both (Ian and George) clarify whether your acks apply to
Andrew's series (or single patch?) from last year or to Julien's patch
or to both.
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-08 11:18 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2013-05-08 12:14 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-08 12:51 ` Ian Jackson
2013-05-10 14:02 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2013-05-08 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell
Cc: patches@linaro.org, George Dunlap, Julien Grall, Ian Jackson,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Jan Beulich
On 08/05/13 12:18, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 11:22 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>>> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
>>>> I did attempt to fix this before with
>>>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
>>>>
>>>> Please allow this to constitute a "ping" regarding the patch on that email.
>>> We had a little thread about this then.
>>>
>>> At the time I thought we also needed this patch, before yours:
>>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
>>>
>>> It looks from that thread like I was hoping for an ack from someone
>>> else on my patch.
>>>
>>> These look like bugfixes to me. George, are they OK for 4.3 ?
>> Hrm, I'm not terribly happy about this kind of change this late in the
>> day, but I think overall it's best to fix this.
>>
>> Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
> This old mail is long gone from my INBOX, can I get either a resend or a
> set of message ids which I can track down?
>
> Also can you both (Ian and George) clarify whether your acks apply to
> Andrew's series (or single patch?) from last year or to Julien's patch
> or to both.
Single patch, as far as this is concerned.
~Andrew
>
> Ian.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-08 12:14 ` Andrew Cooper
@ 2013-05-08 12:51 ` Ian Jackson
2013-05-08 12:59 ` George Dunlap
2013-05-10 14:02 ` Ian Campbell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Jackson @ 2013-05-08 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper
Cc: Ian Campbell, patches@linaro.org, George Dunlap, Julien Grall,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Jan Beulich
Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
> On 08/05/13 12:18, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 11:22 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >>> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
> >>>> I did attempt to fix this before with
> >>>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
...
> >>> At the time I thought we also needed this patch, before yours:
> >>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
> >>>
> >>> It looks from that thread like I was hoping for an ack from someone
> >>> else on my patch.
> >>>
> >>> These look like bugfixes to me. George, are they OK for 4.3 ?
> >> Hrm, I'm not terribly happy about this kind of change this late in the
> >> day, but I think overall it's best to fix this.
Perhaps I don't understand the freeze policy. I thought we were still
accepting bugfixes ? I guess at some point we'll start accepting
fixes only for release-critical bugs, but surely not yet ?
> >> Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
> > This old mail is long gone from my INBOX, can I get either a resend or a
> > set of message ids which I can track down?
> >
> > Also can you both (Ian and George) clarify whether your acks apply to
> > Andrew's series (or single patch?) from last year or to Julien's patch
> > or to both.
>
> Single patch, as far as this is concerned.
I meant exactly the two patches in these emails
http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
in that order.
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-08 12:51 ` Ian Jackson
@ 2013-05-08 12:59 ` George Dunlap
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: George Dunlap @ 2013-05-08 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Jackson
Cc: Ian Campbell, patches@linaro.org, Andrew Cooper, Julien Grall,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Jan Beulich
On 08/05/13 13:51, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
>> On 08/05/13 12:18, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 11:22 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
>>>>>> I did attempt to fix this before with
>>>>>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
> ...
>>>>> At the time I thought we also needed this patch, before yours:
>>>>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks from that thread like I was hoping for an ack from someone
>>>>> else on my patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> These look like bugfixes to me. George, are they OK for 4.3 ?
>>>> Hrm, I'm not terribly happy about this kind of change this late in the
>>>> day, but I think overall it's best to fix this.
> Perhaps I don't understand the freeze policy. I thought we were still
> accepting bugfixes ? I guess at some point we'll start accepting
> fixes only for release-critical bugs, but surely not yet ?
I haven't been using a strict rule; I've been attempting to approach
each request from a risk/benefits perspective. In this case, the change
doesn't look *terribly* risky; but it does seem like there may be a bit
of risk, and overall the benefit didn't seem to be terribly large
either. On balance, in my judgement it comes pretty close to the line.
It's quite possible I'm judging inaccurately in this case -- either
overestimating the risk, or underestimating the benefit. But it's
probably better to have a discussion about that in a case where we
actually disagree about the conclusion. :-)
-George
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems
2013-05-08 12:14 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-08 12:51 ` Ian Jackson
@ 2013-05-10 14:02 ` Ian Campbell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-05-10 14:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper
Cc: patches@linaro.org, George Dunlap, Julien Grall, Ian Jackson,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Julien Grall, Jan Beulich
On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 13:14 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 08/05/13 12:18, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 11:22 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >>> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems"):
> >>>> I did attempt to fix this before with
> >>>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html
> >>>>
> >>>> Please allow this to constitute a "ping" regarding the patch on that email.
> >>> We had a little thread about this then.
> >>>
> >>> At the time I thought we also needed this patch, before yours:
> >>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00870.html
> >>>
> >>> It looks from that thread like I was hoping for an ack from someone
> >>> else on my patch.
> >>>
> >>> These look like bugfixes to me. George, are they OK for 4.3 ?
> >> Hrm, I'm not terribly happy about this kind of change this late in the
> >> day, but I think overall it's best to fix this.
> >>
> >> Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
> > This old mail is long gone from my INBOX, can I get either a resend or a
> > set of message ids which I can track down?
> >
> > Also can you both (Ian and George) clarify whether your acks apply to
> > Andrew's series (or single patch?) from last year or to Julien's patch
> > or to both.
>
> Single patch, as far as this is concerned.
Are you planning to resend as requested? (or did I miss it?)
AIUI Ians c-stubdom patch is no longer needed since stubdom got
configure'd up.
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-05-10 14:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-05-02 23:17 [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems Julien Grall
2013-05-03 7:15 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-03 8:43 ` Ian Campbell
2013-05-03 9:53 ` Ian Campbell
2013-05-03 10:52 ` Julien Grall
2013-05-03 11:13 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-07 17:27 ` Ian Jackson
2013-05-08 10:22 ` George Dunlap
2013-05-08 11:18 ` Ian Campbell
2013-05-08 12:14 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-05-08 12:51 ` Ian Jackson
2013-05-08 12:59 ` George Dunlap
2013-05-10 14:02 ` Ian Campbell
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.