[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAB=NE6WFRqFnCsY=EnfzBAKDeUDqfUgUNxZsVB-VBxy-QL5C9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:04:44 -0600
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>, Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware/Makefile: force recompilation if makefile changes
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 03:59:52PM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:15:07AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 09:31:56AM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> > > If you modify the target asm we currently do not force the
>> > > recompilation of the firmware files. The target asm is in
>> > > the firmware/Makefile, peg this file as a dependency to
>> > > require re-compilation of firmware targets when the asm
>> > > changes.
>> >
>> > Why would changing the Makefile require the asm to change?
>>
>> The Makefile is the file that provides the assembly logic, so
>> changing the asm should affect recreating the binary.
>
> Ah, I see it now, that's horrid, echoing asm from the Makefile itself :)
Yeah, I can change the way that works but I think I would much prefer
to make that a separate atomic functional change.
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists