![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread Patch in this message |
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 07:33:39PM -0500, Dustin Kirkland wrote: > It looks like it may not be easy to drop in modules_update as a more > efficient alternative to modules_install, but note that is not the patch > that Kylie submitted... The problem to be solved is the long time it takes to do "make modules_install" when working on a single module. Instead of bringing in more or less complex solutions what about extending "make dir/module.ko" to include the installation of the module. Something like: "make MI=1 dir/module.ko" where MI=1 tells us to install the said module. I'm not particular found of the syntax - anyone with a better proposal? Untested sample patch below. Sam diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index fc8e08c..0c0649c 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -1312,6 +1312,11 @@ # Modules $(Q)$(MAKE) KBUILD_MODULES=$(if $(CONFIG_MODULES),1) \ $(build)=$(build-dir) $(@:.ko=.o) $(Q)$(MAKE) -rR -f $(srctree)/scripts/Makefile.modpost +ifneq ($(MI),) + cp $@ $(MODLIB)/kernel/$(dir $@) + if [ -r System.map -a -x $(DEPMOD) ]; then \ + $(DEPMOD) -ae -F System.map $(depmod_opts) $(KERNELRELEASE); fi +endif # FIXME Should go into a make.lib or something # =========================================================================== - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2006-04-15 08:47 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||