On 17.2.2010 18:31, Michal Marek wrote:
> On 17.2.2010 18:20, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:57:42PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
>>> On 12.2.2010 20:05, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>>> On 02/12/2010 09:47 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> However, this is generic code and for the above to work we have to
>>>>> enforce x86-specific CFLAGS for it. What is the preferred way to do
>>>>> that?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's a question for Michal and the kbuild list. Michal?
>>>
>>> (I was offline last week).
>>>
>>> The _preferred_ way probably is not to do it :), but otherwise you can
>>> set CFLAGS_hweight.o depending on CONFIG_X86(_32|_64), just like you do
>>> in arch/x86/lib/Makefile already.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be better if we had something like ARCH_CFLAGS_hweight.o
>> which gets set in the arch Makefile instead?
>
> We could, but is it worth it if there is only one potential user so far?
> IMO just put the condition to lib/Makefile now and if there turn out to
> be more cases like this, we can add support for ARCH_CFLAGS_foo.o then.
It wouldn't work actually, because such variable would then apply to all
hweight.o targets in the tree. But another way would be:
arch/x86/Kconfig
config ARCH_HWEIGHT_CFLAGS
string
default "..." if X86_32
default "..." if X86_64
lib/Makefile
CFLAGS_hweight.o = $(CONFIG_ARCH_HWEIGHT_CFLAGS)
Michal
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
