From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1D4hGB-0002uJ-8q for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 07:20:07 -0800 Received: from smtp001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.32]) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 4.41) id 1D4hG8-00051f-Kb for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 07:20:07 -0800 From: Blaisorblade Subject: Re: [uml-devel] Re: [PATCH] uml: support a separate build tree; support USER_OBJS dependencies References: <200502161930.55206.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200502241919.58716.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 19:19:58 +0100 To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Vadim Abrossimov , Jeff Dike On Saturday 19 February 2005 15:04, Vadim Abrossimov wrote: > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:30:54 +0100, Blaisorblade > > wrote: > > Ok, I have two more requests, if possible: > > 1) add something like arch/um/Rules.make which is included everywhere > > needed > > Find below the patch which implements Paolo's suggestion with one > exception: The patch is totally mangled by the mailer, sorry. Could you please reattach it? I've tried fixing it by hand but hadn't got the time. *) Another suggestion (I'll implement it if you are not going to): the creation of USER_SINGLE_OBJS should also be moved to Makefile.rules (the below form should be the more general one); so even the "$(filter %_user.o, $(USER_SINGLE_OBJS))" snippet could move there. USER_SINGLE_OBJS = $(foreach f,$(patsubst %.o,%,$(obj-y) $(obj-m)), $($(f)-objs)) *) About http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/work/current/2.6/2.6.11-rc3-mm2/patches/user-obj-cleanup at his end: I've seen that for stub.S you don't succeed to get it working. Have you tried setting a_flags for that one only? *) Someone who has a working tree with this can check whether enabling CONFIG_MODVERSIONS works well? Without it it does not work, for what I remember, exactly for the kbuild problem. When time ago I built a similar patch which changed c_flags (it hacked the main Makefiles though) it started to work well, since the object postprocessing step was also done. So this patch should also achieve this goal, I think. *) (Slightly unrelated) About this change in the "skas0" patch: Index: linux-2.6.10/arch/um/Makefile-i386 =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.10.orig/arch/um/Makefile-i386 2005-02-12 13:57:48.000000000 -0500 +++ linux-2.6.10/arch/um/Makefile-i386 2005-02-14 12:36:37.000000000 -0500 @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ endif endif -CFLAGS += -U__$(SUBARCH)__ -U$(SUBARCH) +CFLAGS += -U__$(SUBARCH)__ -U$(SUBARCH) $(STUB_CFLAGS) ARCH_USER_CFLAGS := ifneq ($(CONFIG_GPROF),y) Index: linux-2.6.10/arch/um/Makefile-x86_64 =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.10.orig/arch/um/Makefile-x86_64 2005-02-12 13:57:48.000000000 -0500 +++ linux-2.6.10/arch/um/Makefile-x86_64 2005-02-14 12:36:37.000000000 -0500 @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ SUBARCH_LIBS := arch/um/sys-x86_64/ START := 0x60000000 -CFLAGS += -U__$(SUBARCH)__ -fno-builtin +CFLAGS += -U__$(SUBARCH)__ -fno-builtin $(STUB_CFLAGS) ARCH_USER_CFLAGS := -D__x86_64__ ELF_ARCH := i386:x86-64 I guess it's actually useless, because STUB_CFLAGS is not defined at that point, so it should be undone. > I put the common definitions in arch/um/scripts/Makefile.rules to be more > consistent > with my understanding of conventions. This form is also ok for me. If when merging they want it further renamed, we'll take care of it. > Also I noticed that including my original patch in his tarball Jeff > excluded changes > in some Makefiles (e.g. arch/um/kernel/Makefile). > Jeff, had you a problem with those Makefiles? I don't know what Jeff thought, but do you remember the bug I pointed out about USER_CFLAGS and CFLAGS_$@? Well, that problem would cause a compilation problem on arch/um/kernel/frame.o, because this would not work: CFLAGS_frame.o := -fno-omit-frame-pointer -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel