linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86/pci: patches for tip/x86/unify-pci

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080711102310.GA17033@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 11 Jul 2008 12:23:10 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86/pci: patches for tip/x86/unify-pci


* Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> wrote:

> > > > 
> > > > So if I am not mistaken you can kill pci-y entirely:
> > 
> > Yes, but...
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > obj-y                           := fixup.o
> > 
> > ... this is with a plus:
> > 
> > obj-y                           += fixup.o
> 
> obj-y is empty when you enter the Makefile.
> So if you start out with ':=' or '+=' is no difference.

i guess it's safer to use +=, because it's ordering invariant.

We should use := only if we absolutely want to override the current 
rules.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/