Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] s390: delete unneeded #include <linux/kconfig.h> from facilities_src.h | From | Paul Bolle <> | Date | Tue, 08 Nov 2016 10:16:05 +0100 |
| |
Hi Mashiro,
On Tue, 2016-11-08 at 10:50 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > 2016-11-07 21:52 GMT+09:00 Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>: > > So it seems the odd $(LINUXINCLUDE) variable in that Makefile could be > > replaced with something like: > > -include $(srctree)/include/generated/autoconf.h > > This would break O= build because autoconf.h is a generated file. > > Rather, it should be > -include $(objtree)/include/generated/autoconf.h
Three cheers for weasel words like "something like"!
> I thought of this at first, but I was not quite sure > if the file path include/generated/autoconf.h is a guaranteed interface. > > Basically, now we are supposed to include autoconf.h via kconfig.h.
Yes, that seems to go back to commit 2a11c8ea20bf ("kconfig: Introduce IS_ENABLED(), IS_BUILTIN() and IS_MODULE()"). And when the current approach to the IS_*() macros was introduced - with that breathtaking hack that introduced __is_defined() - this was no longer needed but was not changed again.
> So, I thought $(LINUXINCLUDE) is a more stable interface > than specifying the exact path to autoconf.h > > I doubt that nobody would try to change it, but it is just two my cents.
A bit of cruft accumulated around LINUXINCLUDE: a few dubious uses of it (and I think this is one of those); typos (ie, LINUX_INCLUDE); the pointless USERINCLUDE; things like that. It would be nice to remove that cruft. But it needs to be done carefully.
> Anyway, arch/x86/boot/Makefile already > referenced the path to autoconf.h > > So, if you want to change it, I will not oppose to it.
Paul Bolle
| |