From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (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 0198A770E2; Thu, 8 May 2025 05:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746682153; cv=none; b=l9eCenFmfU8jlFLJTOd+l8YBhPqDHeIpNd3OZZGoWoXP/xeRb3bahmWSLe7sny6acWwIqJoNgYWd9iKVamx5RSdyUJQeZw41/jAQCzNE29H+F7Paz/YIGVGXJe8FsGP9pAiSotP78QsEEZ/xEMkc65Kj+FM5B3Pq/aU15VH+gd4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746682153; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YwOuQk1rONMwb2vNGR6Ps53Vx5wyoORvLw5IHYjvLgk=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=tsmCFaCPCdW7au2/LMDlCbH2A99Eg9FAalkX5z2xFgQNH0wDllXImCZWXbKKesTEQY60RajM398tLgIDxtZMYhAb0SIWESvEhUkdYib3mqKI/ZkQxa+du9xqjbktuHmidGinxD5Ww/7k+HW7qI/VyAWGhuKDPJcP+hCfRqLHSvM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=xuOOEdhQ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="xuOOEdhQ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=abgIvTl95IldGAjgwx1zwym4dN3voLN7jqSpis9EXko=; t=1746682152; x=1747891752; b=xuOOEdhQa3u/BDSmZ9WDVMLhrIatfcGtnznlBVx6ep8ZK/V T+yZtq0bJuQreWvxR7NFccGRCSZO62Ph/uhxBrFWAVHmJ2usoV11oHD85A8ruZ6u6DKuOHIReU9XH mmER/qrv3wtz807MPnj9cQRlhF7/ZsqKO6g4Z3xpUlGW+n3vOkGNdhkfJ4v5I1BPucHaxCfi7oLuc issDBtxjYAC/BwhTnZD/f0grVFy+YyhBa8ke+Rc0DmEgs61SqbNyTyvRjSntPX+//0q5OgEbODykR ft0Ssw0a+sS1OEnZkFQ7rdmF/1cm4rPK+E5hMVgjdCQNKuOhXuNfqlHV3cVKDCCw==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.1) (envelope-from ) id 1uCtog-00000009gKj-3jZY; Thu, 08 May 2025 07:29:07 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: let 'make clean' properly clean underlying SUBARCH as well From: Johannes Berg To: Shuah Khan , Masahiro Yamada , linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Anton Ivanov , Richard Weinberger , linux-um@lists.infradead.org, David Gow Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 07:29:06 +0200 In-Reply-To: <9ec50ce0-f60b-4d87-bc44-adaf2a1a97a1@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20250507074936.486648-1-masahiroy@kernel.org> <9ec50ce0-f60b-4d87-bc44-adaf2a1a97a1@linuxfoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Wed, 2025-05-07 at 15:38 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > My workflow: >=20 > - Build kernel on x86_64 with CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT enabled >=20 > - Check for arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h > ls arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h > arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h >=20 > - make ARCH=3Dum O=3D/linux/build > =20 > This patch cleans the source tree, but doesn't remove > arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h >=20 > - ls arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h > arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h Is that even _expected_ to work? If you have x86 built first, I'd almost expect you to have to do "make ARCH=3Dx86 mrproper" before building another ARCH. I don't see how ARCH=3Dum would know how to do a full clean up of ARCH=3Dx86, unless this is somehow arch-independent? Or maybe that's not an issue with other architectures because UML is special in that it uses parts of x86? Though I guess the patch here should make it do that, more or less, but it can't, likely because you're also switching from in-tree build to O=3D build? johannes