Hi Mashiro,
On Tue, 2016-11-08 at 10:50 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> 2016-11-07 21:52 GMT+09:00 Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > So it seems the odd $(LINUXINCLUDE) variable in that Makefile could be
> > replaced with something like:
> > -include $(srctree)/include/generated/autoconf.h
>
> This would break O= build because autoconf.h is a generated file.
>
> Rather, it should be
> -include $(objtree)/include/generated/autoconf.h
Three cheers for weasel words like "something like"!
> I thought of this at first, but I was not quite sure
> if the file path include/generated/autoconf.h is a guaranteed interface.
>
> Basically, now we are supposed to include autoconf.h via kconfig.h.
Yes, that seems to go back to commit 2a11c8ea20bf ("kconfig: Introduce
IS_ENABLED(), IS_BUILTIN() and IS_MODULE()"). And when the current approach to
the IS_*() macros was introduced - with that breathtaking hack that introduced
__is_defined() - this was no longer needed but was not changed again.
> So, I thought $(LINUXINCLUDE) is a more stable interface
> than specifying the exact path to autoconf.h
>
> I doubt that nobody would try to change it, but it is just two my cents.
A bit of cruft accumulated around LINUXINCLUDE: a few dubious uses of it (and
I think this is one of those); typos (ie, LINUX_INCLUDE); the pointless
USERINCLUDE; things like that. It would be nice to remove that cruft. But it
needs to be done carefully.
> Anyway, arch/x86/boot/Makefile already
> referenced the path to autoconf.h
>
> So, if you want to change it, I will not oppose to it.
Paul Bolle
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
