From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1InaAi-0000o4-2B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 09:33:20 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1InaAg-0000la-Cq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 09:33:19 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1InaAg-0000lO-4k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 09:33:18 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.179]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1InaAf-00053M-ML for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 09:33:18 -0400 Message-ID: <4729D583.407@mail.berlios.de> Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:32:51 +0100 From: Stefan Weil MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] How to split vl.h References: <4729B592.5080006@bellard.org> In-Reply-To: <4729B592.5080006@bellard.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Fabrice Bellard schrieb: > Blue Swirl wrote: >> Hi, >> >> With the automatic dependency rule installed, modifying vl.h causes >> all files to be recompiled. This is of course the correct action, but >> it's a major slowdown for development too. > There must be an option in the Makefile to disable the automatic > dependency check. >>From my own experience, I can tell that the automatic dependency check is not really a problem, but makes things much easier and safer (I used it for more than a year now). I never missed a Makefile option to disable it. Of course, changes of vl.h are somehow annoying when they force a rebuild of nearly everything. But in most cases I focus on one target architecture (e.g. mipsel-softmmu), so compilation takes not much time even when everything is compiled. And you always can make a "touch *.o */*.o" if you know what you do and want to prevent a new compilation (or use a private modification of the Makefiles). Options make things more complicated - I don't think we need one here. >> How should we split vl.h into smaller pieces? Give each device a >> header file, like m48t59? What about other stuff exported from vl.c? > The net result is that you will have dozens of header files with only > one line in them as most devices only export one function. So you can group headers - one header for network emulations, one for graphics, ... We had this discussion about splitting vl.h before, and I still think it would be good. > > Regards, > > Fabrice. Regards Stefan