Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] scripts/kconfig/Makefile: Allow KBUILD_DEFCONFIG to be a target

[Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>]

On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 08:50 +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
> On 2015-10-01 08:14, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 22:46 +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
> >> Dne 24.9.2015 v 00:16 Michael Ellerman napsal(a):
> >>> On 23 September 2015 19:50:52 GMT+10:00, Michal Marek
> >>> <mmarek@suse.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 2015-09-23 07:40, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >>>>> +else ifneq ($(wildcard
> >>>> arch/$(SRCARCH)/configs/$(KBUILD_DEFCONFIG)),)
> >>>>> @$(kecho) "*** Default configuration is based on
> >>>> '$(KBUILD_DEFCONFIG)'"
> >>>>> $(Q)$< $(silent)
> >>>> --defconfig=arch/$(SRCARCH)/configs/$(KBUILD_DEFCONFIG) $(Kconfig)
> >>>>> +else +	@$(kecho) "*** Default configuration is based on target
> >>>> '$(KBUILD_DEFCONFIG)'"
> >>>>> +	$(Q)$(MAKE) -f $(srctree)/Makefile $(KBUILD_DEFCONFIG) endif
> >>>>
> >>>> What is the anticipated usage of this? The patch is not needed to
> >>>> make
> >>>>
> >>>> make ppc64le_defconfig
> >>>>
> >>>> work with the second patch. If it was, this would create a loop
> >>>> anyway.
> >>>
> >>> The idea is to make 'make defconfig' work when KBUILD_DEFCONFIG is
> >>> ppc64le_defconfig (which happens for us when uname returns ppc64le)
> >>> and additionally when ppc64le_defconfig is not a real file.
> >>
> >> Ah, that makes sense. You can add
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com>
> >>
> >> if you want.
> > 
> > Thanks. I'll assume by that you mean you're happy if I take both patches
> > through the powerpc tree.
> 
> Yes, I assumed that this was your plan.

I didn't really have a plan :)

It's certainly easiest if I take it in my tree along with the new
ppc64le_defconfig, so I'll do that. Thanks.

cheers