From: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
To: <samitolvanen@google.com>
Cc: <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>, <keescook@chromium.org>,
<lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>, <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
<michal.lkml@markovi.net>, <nathan@kernel.org>,
<ndesaulniers@google.com>, <yj.chiang@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Kbuild: lto: add CONFIG_MAKE_VERSION
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:25:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210709082512.25208-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABCJKufWcp6Hx=8btz6pDNcKvQ21n4BSPZ7cp1Tzhxt0+pQOmw@mail.gmail.com>
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 2:06 AM Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 7:03 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 12:29 PM Lecopzer Chen
> > > > <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > To check the GNU make version. Used by the LTO Kconfig.
> > > > >
> > > > > LTO with MODVERSIONS will fail in generating correct CRC because
> > > > > the makefile rule doesn't work for make with version 3.8X.[1]
> > > > >
> > > > > Thus we need to check make version during selecting on LTO Kconfig.
> > > > > Add CONFIG_MAKE_VERSION which means MAKE_VERSION in canonical digits
> > > > > for arithmetic comparisons.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210616080252.32046-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com/
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > NACK.
> > > >
> > > > "Let's add MAKE_VERSION >= 40200 restriction
> > > > just because I cannot write correct code that
> > > > works for older Make" is a horrible idea.
> > > >
> > > > Also, Kconfig is supposed to check the compiler
> > > > (or toolchains) capability, not host tool versions.
> > >
> > > I feel like requiring a Make that's half a decade old for a feature
> > > that also requires a toolchain released last October ago isn't
> > > entirely unreasonable.
> > >
> > > That being said, if Masahiro prefers not to rely on the wildcard
> > > function's behavior here, which is a reasonable request, we could
> > > simply use the shell to test for the file's existence:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.build b/scripts/Makefile.build
> > > index 34d257653fb4..c6bd62f518ff 100644
> > > --- a/scripts/Makefile.build
> > > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.build
> > > @@ -388,7 +388,7 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_LTO_CLANG) $(CONFIG_MODVERSIONS),y y)
> > > cmd_update_lto_symversions = \
> > > rm -f $@.symversions \
> > > $(foreach n, $(filter-out FORCE,$^), \
> > > - $(if $(wildcard $(n).symversions), \
> > > + $(if $(shell test -s $(n).symversions && echo y), \
> > > ; cat $(n).symversions >> $@.symversions))
> > > else
> > > cmd_update_lto_symversions = echo >/dev/null
> > >
> > > This is not quite as efficient as using wildcard, but should work with
> > > older Make versions too. Thoughts?
> > >
> >
> >
> > I've tested this in both make-4.3 and 3.81, and the CRC is correct.
> > But I'm not sure if anyone would have the "arg list too long" issue.
> >
> > Tested-by: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com>
>
> Thank you for testing. This should produce a command identical to the
> wildcard version (with newer Make versions), so that shouldn't be an
> issue. If nobody objects to this approach, would you mind putting this
> into a proper patch and sending it as v4?
Sure, I'll rebase the whole commit and send as v4 soon.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-09 8:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-02 3:29 [PATCH v3 0/2] Kbuild: lto: add make version checking for MODVERSIONS Lecopzer Chen
2021-07-02 3:29 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] Kbuild: lto: add CONFIG_MAKE_VERSION Lecopzer Chen
2021-07-04 0:15 ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-07-05 2:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
2021-07-05 17:59 ` Sami Tolvanen
2021-07-06 9:06 ` Lecopzer Chen
2021-07-07 17:02 ` Sami Tolvanen
2021-07-09 8:25 ` Lecopzer Chen [this message]
2021-07-02 3:29 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] Kbuild: lto: add make version checking Lecopzer Chen
2021-07-04 0:16 ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-07-05 2:04 ` Masahiro Yamada
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210709082512.25208-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com \
--to=lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com \
--cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=yj.chiang@mediatek.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox