From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6BDD185B56; Thu, 7 Nov 2024 16:01:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730995306; cv=none; b=kDr04ihUAIQB+G8qceL71sASy26fCXNWAwgi5Bkq5TdFkWIdLnvuUpJ8wMlh6ky5y/6lEVN3eRK5TnKDsgModL1qMytqhTpYbhUtVkuQN8CRk3AVXwKVCfWdo2mbQysERIJmnczpfEynZY4ZmcucTyEqUawpGrj5bQfjydTJfSg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730995306; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hMklc/6WmXMZ09yE5NJe+P85xdMeI48PhxKfCNy5kXc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=nSRUqGUAJ1uPtKVcII81AZ7nNJxHK+G2bIIcRSLAy9fKlAeYnyZgywjcZa5uYbO1v7KPP3PJoorhr/fsukwXIVzRUYrJqMJyeI+8ZVmpmmH7zfClYp36BoSFvCtLCbQNjyFQhxgOm/+tAIxWdbMuonBDQLQyj87is9jP2VG59+w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=hxRpCXWW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="hxRpCXWW" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E48AC4CECC; Thu, 7 Nov 2024 16:01:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1730995306; bh=hMklc/6WmXMZ09yE5NJe+P85xdMeI48PhxKfCNy5kXc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=hxRpCXWWnuqesbDNX7V0sh5CLPpZrsc2X058EnX9uOD2aoCCp3jbaGCnHl0biBuTU 1kGpxAnG7rsNmbdlwXq1HdGkDYni+E6g35oKUfovtBtYaQyM4rLKvm6mXfD0BpegqX MULRkO5xotXaEUDb+VBx9nluqS3CFP01Cq56ARCHu8J7Yna9hkW3bps/sUkVHp15hU KG6NkSQRPzOnd/BX0AA6BBcixahnv1BiI7QE0yGIVZ9SMtK7NnPwTzQATjDly4qEwt o3QupO2W1COCQ+iwXYOnoKJJVGCWErJyatlq8OtSi3xoYgbwRWhGfjDYRZf62moAN/ yuBqSBzkMtULA== Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 09:01:43 -0700 From: Nathan Chancellor To: Koakuma Cc: "David S. Miller" , Andreas Larsson , Nick Desaulniers , Bill Wendling , Justin Stitt , glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de, Masahiro Yamada , Nicolas Schier , Jonathan Corbet , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] sparc/build: Put usage of -fcall-used* flags behind cc-option Message-ID: <20241107160143.GA1328360@thelio-3990X> References: <20241029-sparc-cflags-v3-0-b28745a6bd71@protonmail.com> <20241029-sparc-cflags-v3-1-b28745a6bd71@protonmail.com> <20241029222421.GA2632697@thelio-3990X> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 04:59:14AM +0000, Koakuma wrote: > Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > > > Clang builds now succeed with this series and builds with GCC 14.2.0 > > continue to pass and boot successfully. > > > > Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor nathan@kernel.org > > > > Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor nathan@kernel.org > > > > One comment below, please carry these tags forward if there are future > > revisions without substantial technical changes. > > Forgive me for still being unfamiliar with the term, but does this mean that No worries, it is definitely a customary thing. > when I send a v4 I should paste the Reviewed-by and Tested-by lines into the > commit message of the patch? Yes, you should add them either right above or right below your signoff. It is up to the submitter to add tags that have been sent on prior revisions when sending an updated version, assuming that there has not been a reason to drop them, such as substantial changes from a prior version that might require a new review or testing. In that case, I typically add a note in the changelog as to why I did not carry them forward. The tip documentation 4.2.3 through 4.2.6 has some good information about some other Linux kernel commit message expectations if you find yourself submitting more patches in the future: https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-tip.html#changelog > > > -KBUILD_CFLAGS += -m32 -mcpu=v8 -pipe -mno-fpu -fcall-used-g5 -fcall-used-g7 > > > +KBUILD_CFLAGS += -m32 -mcpu=v8 -pipe -mno-fpu $(call cc-option,-fcall-used-g5) $(call cc-option,-fcall-used-g7) > > > > > > Small nit, this (and the one in the vdso) could probably be one > > cc-option call? Is it likely that one flag would be implemented in the > > compiler without the other? > > > > $(call cc-option,-fcall-used-g5 -fcall-used-g7) > > Ah, didn't know it's possible to do that, the other uses of it I see seem > to use one flag per call. I'll test and send a new revision, thanks. Yeah, I would agree that it is typical to use cc-option for one flag at a time but the entire string just gets passed to $(CC), so there is technically no limitation for how many flags can be tested. This happens to be a rare instance where the flags share a common internal compiler implementation so we know that one cannot be implemented without the other. Cheers, Nathan