From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Add LDFLAGS-u-boot variable and move some linker option to this
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 15:11:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201012271511.54110.vapier@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101227185808.BBA0A152438@gemini.denx.de>
On Monday, December 27, 2010 13:58:08 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> > > > This move linker option used by the last of u-boot in LDFLAGS_u-boot
> > > > variable. And the option to use in ld uses LDFLAGS variable.
> > >
> > > Can you please explain why this would be needed?
> >
> > he explained in the previous thread why we need to split things. there
> > are flags that are needed for all linker options and there are flags
> > needed just for the final u-boot link.
>
> Such an explanation belongs into the commit message.
yes, but that isnt what you asked
> > > > -LDFLAGS += --gc-sections -m elf32bfin
> > > > +LDFLAGS_u-boot += --gc-sections
> > >
> > > The name "LDFLAGS_u-boot" may actually work here, but iut is
> > > inconsistent with other such variables names, and using '-' in a name
> > > is probably not a good idea either.
> >
> > it isnt inconsistent. the convention is $(XFLAGS_$(@F)) and we just
> > happen to
>
> Can you please point me to an example where this has been used in
> U-Boot before? Or why do you call this a convention?
(1) it's what's used in Linux and every build system based on that (kbuild)
(2) u-boot is slowly moving to the conventions already in use by Linux
(3) u-boot already uses this specific convention for every .c/.s/.S file --
simply look at the bottom of config.mk
it makes perfect sense to keep the existing syntax and extend LDFLAGS behavior
to it rather than coming up with some new specific variable that only applies
to the final link of u-boot. otherwise every other final link we have in u-
boot will need its own random style (examples, standalone, spl, ...).
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20101227/205265c0/attachment.pgp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-27 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-27 7:00 [U-Boot] [PATCH] Add LDFLAGS-u-boot variable and move some linker option to this Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
2010-12-27 10:47 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-12-27 16:46 ` Mike Frysinger
2010-12-27 18:58 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-12-27 20:11 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
2010-12-27 23:23 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-12-28 1:00 ` Mike Frysinger
2010-12-30 2:02 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-01-05 6:52 ` Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
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=201012271511.54110.vapier@gentoo.org \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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