[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/EFI: correct compiler probing
On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 11:48:12AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > Passing in $(CFLAGS) means also requesting inclusion of certain headers > (via -include command line options). That's particularly xen/config.h, > which in turn requires generated/autoconf.h. This has not caused any > problems so far only because arch.mk is processed twice, and the missing The first pass is ignore because "include/config/auto.conf" is missing, and generating that will also generates "generated/autoconf.h" I think. So result don't matter, and make restart from scratch once "auto.conf" is generated. > header on the 1st pass would be there on the 2nd. Having added an > inclusion of asm/asm-macros.h to x86'es asm/config.h, the 2nd pass then I don't see asm-macros.h been included in asm/config.h, is this in a pending patch? > also fails on an initial, pristine build. > > As per dd40177c1bc8 ("x86-64/EFI: add CFLAGS to check compile") dropping > the use of $(CFLAGS) altogether isn't an option, though. Hence remove > the problematic options only. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> In any case, patch looks fine: Reviewed-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > This is now the 3rd place where the -include needs dropping. I was half > decided to introduce a new lazy-expansion variable, yet it's not > consistently $(CFLAGS) that the options need purging from. Thoughts? Something like that I guess, we probably want to avoid the "-include" while testing the compiler. I guess introducing "-include config.h" once we have all CFLAGS might make more sense, that is at about the time where XEN_CFLAGS is currently introduced, but I haven't checked if that's fine to do. Cheers, -- Anthony PERARD
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |