Hi Ivan, First of all, thank you for noticing this and sending a patch! I think the title of this commit could be improved a little bit. I think using the prefix "kbuild: doc:" would be good, as that seems to be the most common prefix I see when I look at 'git log --oneline' for this file. This is not really a typo fix but more of a generalization because clang is now a viable alternative to GCC, which could also be included in commit message below. I suspect that was probably not the case when this documentation was written. On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 02:37:33PM +0300, Давыдов Иван Алексеевич wrote: > In this part of the documentation, $(CC) is meant, but gcc is written. > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Davydov <mailto:davydoff33@xxxxxxxxx> As for the patch itself, I cannot apply it directly from mutt or the mailing list because it is quoted-printable: $ curl -LSs https://lore.kernel.org/all/1935A993-DAB0-4092-A1FE-B6501EE8E0DC@xxxxxxxxx/raw | git apply -3v error: git diff header lacks filename information when removing 1 leading pathname component (line 63) I suspect that is also why your signoff has a mailto: in it. Consider looking at git-send-email or b4 send for sending your patches so that your mail client does not mangle them in this way: https://nickdesaulniers.github.io/blog/2017/05/16/submitting-your-first-patch-to-the-linux-kernel-and-responding-to-feedback/ https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/contributor/send.html > --- > diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst > index 991ce6081e35..be43990f1e7f 100644 > --- a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst > +++ b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst > @@ -578,7 +578,7 @@ cc-option > Note: cc-option uses KBUILD_CFLAGS for $(CC) options > > cc-option-yn > - cc-option-yn is used to check if gcc supports a given option > + cc-option-yn is used to check if $(CC) supports a given option > and return "y" if supported, otherwise "n". > > Example:: > @@ -596,7 +596,7 @@ cc-option-yn > Note: cc-option-yn uses KBUILD_CFLAGS for $(CC) options > > cc-disable-warning > - cc-disable-warning checks if gcc supports a given warning and returns > + cc-disable-warning checks if $(CC) supports a given warning and returns > the commandline switch to disable it. This special function is needed, > because gcc 4.4 and later accept any unknown -Wno-* option and only > warn about it if there is another warning in the source file. > @@ -606,7 +606,7 @@ cc-disable-warning > KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, unused-but-set-variable) > > In the above example, -Wno-unused-but-set-variable will be added to > - KBUILD_CFLAGS only if gcc really accepts it. > + KBUILD_CFLAGS only if $(CC) really accepts it. > > gcc-min-version > gcc-min-version tests if the value of $(CONFIG_GCC_VERSION) is greater than Other than the comments above, which are simple process things, this change overall looks correct. Consider fixing those up and sending a v2 and I will be happy to provide a Reviewed-by tag. Cheers, Nathan
