From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
paulus@samba.org, davem@davemloft.net, jaxboe@fusionio.com,
tj@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@infradead.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix UAPI fallout
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:35:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <30780.1350653737@warthog.procyon.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121014085617.GA22544@gmail.com>
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> What we want in .c files are not ../.. inclusions but the
> 'seemless' <linux/abc.h> inclusions. Which is the overwhelming
> majority, gladly. Do we want to make that the 100% majority?
I think this is going to be necessary for when x86 gets merged. x86's
asm/unistd.h #includes uapi/asm/unistd.h, so you can't manually specify the
header without also specifying a -I flag.
I've been having a prod at it, and this seems to partially work:
-BASIC_CFLAGS = -Iutil/include -Iarch/$(ARCH)/include -I$(OUTPUT)util -I$(TRACE_EVENT_DIR) -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_GNU_SOURCE
+$(info XXX $(srctree))
+
+BASIC_CFLAGS = -Iutil/include -Iarch/$(ARCH)/include -I../../arch/$(ARCH)/include -I$(OUTPUT)util -I$(TRACE_EVENT_DIR) -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_GNU_SOURCE
However, I'm trying to work out what will happen if this is run in a separate
output dir, but if I do:
make tools/perf O=build_dir
from the bottom directory, I get:
scripts/Makefile.include:2: *** O=build_dir does not exist. Stop.
The problem is that the bottom-level Makefile does this:
tools/: FORCE
$(Q)$(MAKE) LDFLAGS= MAKEFLAGS= -C $(src)/tools/
tools/%: FORCE
$(Q)$(MAKE) LDFLAGS= MAKEFLAGS= -C $(src)/tools/ $*
which changes the directory, rendering a relative O= that would be good for
building the normal kernel useless for building a tool. Should these rules
respecify the O= flag here, or should we give an error if someone tries it?
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-19 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-13 10:48 [GIT PULL] UAPI disintegration for include/linux/{,byteorder/}*.h David Howells
2012-10-14 0:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-10-14 8:56 ` [PATCH] perf: Fix UAPI fallout Ingo Molnar
2012-10-14 15:38 ` David Miller
2012-10-15 8:56 ` David Howells
2012-10-19 13:35 ` David Howells [this message]
2012-10-15 8:52 ` [GIT PULL] UAPI disintegration for include/linux/{,byteorder/}*.h David Howells
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=30780.1350653737@warthog.procyon.org.uk \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@infradead.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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