On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:27 AM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2017-06-14 8:08 GMT+09:00 Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> cc-option uses KBUILD_CFLAGS and KBUILD_CPPFLAGS when it determines
>> whether an option is supported or not. This is fine for options used to
>> build the kernel itself, however some components like the x86 boot code
>> use a different set of flags.
>>
>> Add the new macro cc-option-raw which serves the same purpose as
>> cc-option but has additional parameters. One parameter is the compiler
>> with which the check should be performed, the other the compiler options
>> to be used instead KBUILD_C*FLAGS. The compiler parameter allows other
>> macros like hostcc-option to be implemented on top of cc-option-raw.
>>
>> Also rework cc-option to make use of cc-option-raw.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
>> Suggested-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Changed macro name from Add cc-option-no-kbuild to cc-option-raw
>> - Added compiler as parameter to the macro
>> - Reworked cc-option to make use of cc-option-raw
>> - Updated commit message
>>
>> scripts/Kbuild.include | 9 +++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>
> Acked-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> (if nothing better pops up)
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Regarding the naming, __cc-option might be better than cc-option-raw,
but the current version is fine too.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
