From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 22:11:51 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] libdrm: buildroot patchstack - static linking In-Reply-To: <20191205215234.7058f6df@gmx.net> References: <20191205215234.7058f6df@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20191205221151.214db463@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 21:54:53 +0100 Peter Seiderer wrote: > some progress on up-streaming the buildroot libdrm patch stack: > > - 0001-Add-ARM-support-into-xf86drm.h.patch > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/merge_requests/31 > Acked, but with one further question 'why not catch-all __ARM_ARCH?' > Thomas - you touched the patch and added the comment, any further input? Well, my comment explains it all: ldrex/strex only exist on ARM >= v6, but __ARM_ARCH is true for all ARM ISAs, including ARMv4 and ARMv5, which Buildroot supports, but don't provide ldrex/strex. > - 0004-meson.build-enable-static-build.patch > declined https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/merge_requests/28 > 'Closing the MR, but feel free to reopen if it turns out someone has > a real need for this' > > Anyone out there using libdrm static linking? But what is the cost for upstream to use the correct library() Meson macro/function instead of shared_library() ? It is shorter, and does the job. I'm not sure why upstream is reluctant to merge this. > - 0005-tests-meson.build-disable-nouveau-tests-for-static-b.patch > folded into previous one https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/merge_requests/27 > and declined So, they basically say they don't want to support static linking at all? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com