[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm: clean up build variables
On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 07:44 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 27.01.16 at 15:30, <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 1/25/16 5:27 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 15:47 -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote: > > > > @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ ALL_OBJS := $(TARGET_SUBARCH)/head.o $(ALL_OBJS) > > > > Â > > > > Â$(TARGET): $(TARGET)-syms $(TARGET).axf > > > > Â $(OBJCOPY) -O binary -S $< $@ > > > > -ifeq (arm64,$(XEN_TARGET_ARCH)) > > > > +ifdef CONFIG_ARM_64 > > > > > > The old way looks to be the prevailing normal form. I don't > > > especially > > > object to the change but things ought to remain consistent. > > > > Which part? Using arm32/arm64? Or having the if blocks rather than > > var-$(CONFIG_THING) ? > > > > My goal here is consistency and that was to standardize on the form of > > var-$(CONFIG_THING) across the board. > > But there's no var-$(CONFIG_THING) in the code above. Indeed, I was referring to the change from: -ifeq (arm64,$(XEN_TARGET_ARCH)) to +ifdef CONFIG_ARM_64 While: ifeq ($(CONFIG_ARM_64),y) is the more prevalent style. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |