From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.pbcl.net ([88.198.119.4] helo=hetzner.pbcl.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QoEgR-0000rv-HA for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:06:55 +0200 Received: from cambridge.roku.com ([81.142.160.137] helo=[172.30.1.145]) by hetzner.pbcl.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QoEcG-0002Qk-Hw for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:02:36 +0200 From: Phil Blundell To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:02:35 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4E36D800.1050906@mentor.com> References: <1312208500-13381-1-git-send-email-galak@kernel.crashing.org> <1312209045.30326.515.camel@phil-desktop> <4727DFCB-0AA2-43D1-A0CA-58717D815FE8@kernel.crashing.org> <1312214835.30326.528.camel@phil-desktop> <4E36D800.1050906@mentor.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2- Message-ID: <1312290156.4325.19.camel@phil-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc: Add ability for tune files to pass in configure options to gcc X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:06:55 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 09:44 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > On 08/01/2011 09:07 AM, Phil Blundell wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 09:37 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > >> Not sure I understand the statement about disambiguate the resulting compilers, on PPC where I intend to utilize this we'd have the toolchains already named something like: > > > > The thing about disambiguating was that, if you're going to modify the > > configure opts for gcc-cross based (indirectly) on ${MACHINE} you need > > to consider what happens if you have a single build directory that's > > being used for multiple MACHINEs. > > What, I think, Kumar is driving at is why are you saying MACHINE when > it's a per core tune he's doing. eg, every e5500 would do --with-cpu=e5500 I said MACHINE because, in general, it's the MACHINE which selects the tune. If it's the case that (for powerpc at least) all the tunes end up setting a distinct PACKAGE_ARCH then this probably is a non-issue there, but that isn't true in the general case. (For example, the arm926ejs tune file sets PACKAGE_ARCH=armv5te or something, so it wouldn't be sensible for it to be configuring gcc --with-cpu=arm926ej-s.) Likewise for gcc-cross, if you're going to let this apply there then you need to make sure that the TARGET_ARCH value in the triplet is at least as specific as the tuning you ask for, otherwise you will end up with multiple different compilers all called armv5te-oe-linux-gcc or whatever. p.