linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] selftests/nolibc: don't pass CC to toplevel Makefile

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250819035448.GA17734@1wt.eu>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 05:54:48 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
        Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
        Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] selftests/nolibc: don't pass CC to toplevel Makefile

On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 04:07:21PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> On 2025-08-17 11:39:05+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 10:30:52AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > On 2025-07-21 04:56:27+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 05:38:28PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> 
> (...)
> 
> > > > I think I'd be fine with this, but then we need to make it
> > > > explicit in the help message and fix the current one, possibly just
> > > > with this:
> > > > 
> > > > -	@echo "  nolibc-test       build the executable (uses \$$CC and \$$CROSS_COMPILE)"
> > > > +	@echo "  nolibc-test       build the executable (uses \$$CC)"
> > > 
> > > I don't think this is correct. $CC itself depends on $CROSS_COMPILE
> > > through tools/scripts/Makefile.include.
> > 
> > I don't understand what you mean by "depends on" here. CC defaults
> > to ${CROSS_COMPILE}gcc and may override it if set. So if one sets
> > CC, CROSS_COMPILE will not be used for it. Or maybe we could change
> > it to this to indicate a precedence if that's the idea you want to
> > convey ?
> > 
> >  -	@echo "  nolibc-test       build the executable (uses \$$CC and \$$CROSS_COMPILE)"
> >  +	@echo "  nolibc-test       build the executable (uses \$$CC or \$$CROSS_COMPILE)"
> 
> Yes, that is the idea. 
> I pushed a commit to this effect to nolibc/for-next.

OK perfect, thank you!
Willy