lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: module builds need improvement / top Makefile not good enough
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 05:53:14 -0800 FN wrote:

> That's not for you to decide.
> Just pass down all variables that may be relevant to my module builds
> and let me take it from there, for example
> chdir $(M)
> $(MYMAKE) CC="..." LD="..." AR="..." CFLAGS="..." MODFLAGS="..."
> INCL="..."
> WHATHAVE_YOU="whatever" modules
>
> Currently I face the following situation -- I try to build 2 drivers
> from the same Makefile
> -----------
> CWD := $(shell pwd)
> obj-m := driver1.o driver2.o
> driver1-y := d1/d2/d3/f1.o d1/d2/f2.o
> driver2-y := d1/d5/file1.o d1/d6/file2.o
> # ill conceived kbuild framework doesn't allow me to reduce granularity
> # of EXTRA_FLAGS
> $(addprefix $(CWD)/,d1/d2/d3/f1.o d1/d5/file1.o: EXTRA_CFLAGS :=
> -DMASK=0x123
> $(addprefix $(CWD)/,d1/d2/f2.o d1/d6/file2.o) : EXTRA_CFLAGS :=
> -DMASK=0x456
> # fine grained scope for EXTRA_CFLAGS (supported by gnu make) doesn't
> work
> ----------
> There are 2 problems here
> 1) kbuild is forcing me to declare EXTRA_CFLAGS in global scope and
> I can't build my drivers properly because the MASKs are incompatible.
> 2) assuming that modules are buildable, if I do "make clean" there is
> leftover
> junk in all of these places d1/d2/d3 d1/d5 d1/d2 d1/d6.
> There is a danger associated with that junk (or state), dependency
> generation
> may be broken which it provably is in some cases (remember -Iinc_dir1
> -Iinc_dir2
> vs. -Iinc_dir2 -Iinc_dir1 example I gave earlier) and I can't rely on
> it.
> So then I need to be able to clean all, but the "clean:" target can't
> clean
> inexpensively in multiple directorie, i.e. must do recursive
> traversal to clean.
>
> No, you can't send me off to some little kbuild mailing list.
> I've raised concerns that probably affects hundreds of module builders.
> kbuild works well only in the simplest of build scenarios but doesn't
> scale and that's a deficiency that should be urgently addressed.
> The leadership of the linux kernel is going to have to make
> a decision and possibly hire a competent contractor to fix these
> problems.
> Are you guys perfectionists or what?

Not at all.

I think you'll need to convince/show us that there is a real
problem that cannot be solved by current Kbuild.

E.g., instead of building 2 drivers from the same Makefile
where you cannot reduce granularity of EXTRA_FLAGS, can it be done
with 2 makefiles? and if not, why not?

---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
-
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: 2007-03-05 17:53    [W:0.107 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site