From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33708 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751330Ab2BXWTP (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:19:15 -0500 Message-ID: <4F480CDE.8010605@suse.cz> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 23:19:10 +0100 From: Michal Marek MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Kconfig and toolchain dependencies References: <4F2C51A5.1040800@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <4F2C51A5.1040800@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: "linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ingo Molnar Dne 3.2.2012 22:29, H. Peter Anvin napsal(a): > Right now, we don't have a good way to encode toolchain dependencies in > Kconfig. This makes it hard to add optional features which depend on > newer toolchain features. > > If we just add them, then it breaks all*config and randconfig on > platforms with the older toolchains unless the user manually adds > exclusion rules. This is bad for testing. > > It seems relatively straightforward to do if we were to manifest some > CONFIG_ variables based on the target toolchain, e.g. > > CONFIG_GCC=0x040601 (sorry for the late reply) It would be a bit tricky, because the toolchain version depends also on CONFIG_CROSS_COMPILE. So Kconfig would need to know the semantics of CONFIG_CROSS_COMPILE and CONFIG_GCC and the dependency of the latter on the former. Michal