Date:   Mon, 26 Jul 2021 15:27:02 -0500
From:   ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Fangrui Song <maskray@...gle.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Makefile: infer CROSS_COMPILE from SRCARCH for LLVM=1 LLVM_IAS=1

Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 4:58 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 7:43 PM Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 1:05 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > We do most of the other heavy lifting in this area in Kconfig anyway,
>> > why not add that compiler choice?
>> >
>> > Obviously it would be gated by the tests to see which compilers are
>> > _installed_ (and that they are valid versions), so that it doesn't ask
>> > stupid things ("do you want gcc or clang" when only one of them is
>> > installed and/or viable).
>>
>> I don't see a good way of making Kconfig options both select the
>> compiler and defining variables based on the compiler, since that
>> would mean teaching Kconfig about re-evaluating all compiler
>> dependent settings whenever the first option changes.
>>
>> I do have another idea that I think would work though.
>>
>> > Hmm? So then any "LLVM=1" thing would be about the "make config"
>> > stage, not the actual build stage.
>> >
>> > (It has annoyed me for years that if you want to cross-compile, you
>> > first have to do "make ARCH=xyz config" and then remember to do "make
>> > ARCH=xyz" for the build too, but I cross-compile so seldom that I've
>> > never really cared).
>>
>> The best thing that I have come up with is a pre-configure step, where
>> an object tree gets seeded with a makefile fragment that gets included
>> for any 'make' invocation. This would set 'ARCH=', 'CROSS_COMPILE',
>> 'CC=' and possibly any other option that gets passed to 'make' as
>> a variable and has to exist before calling 'make *config'.
>
>
> There is no need to add a hook to include such makefile fragment(s).
>
> Quite opposite, you can put your Makefile (in a different filename)
> that includes the top Makefile.
>
>
> I think this is what people are already doing:
>
>
> GNU Make looks for 'GNUmakefile', 'makefile', and 'Makefile'
> in this order.
>
>
> So, you can put 'GNUmakefile' with your favorite setups.
>
>
> $ cat GNUmakefile
> ARCH=arm64
> CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux-gnu-
> CC=clang
> include Makefile

Very weird.

I just tested this and it does not work.
I did this:

$ cat GNUmakefile
ARCH = alpha
CROSS_COMPILE = $(arch-prefix alpha)
include Makefile

In one of my build directories and the main makefile simply does not see
the value of ARCH or CROSS_COMPILE I set.  I have confirmed that my
GNUmakefile is being read, because everything breaks if I remove the
include line.

Does anyone have any ideas?

Something so we don't have to specify all of these variables on the make
command line would be nice.

Eric

Powered by blists - more mailing lists