[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOd=0tn3DeqDkKxxk61EvHY9Vb+SnHkXugUmHCMFF_0VVoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 16:36:20 -0800
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kbuild: Make $(LLVM) more flexible
On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 7:47 AM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 11:08:29AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 9:14 AM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > +If your LLVM tools are not available in your PATH, you can supply their
> > > +location using the LLVM variable with a trailing slash: ::
> > > +
> > > + make LLVM=/path/to/llvm/
> > > +
> > > +which will use ``/path/to/llvm/clang``, ``/path/to/llvm/ld.lld``, etc.
> >
> > I don't think we should do this; `PATH=/path/to/llvm/ make LLVM=1`
> > works and (my interpretation of what) Masahiro said "if anyone asks
> > for this, here's how we could do that." I don't think I've seen an
> > explicit ask for that. I'd rather LLVM= have 2 behaviors than 3, but I
> > won't hold this patch up over that. Either way:
>
> Right, there has not been an explicit ask for the prefix support yet,
> although I know I personally would use it,
Then let that be reason enough. :)
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists