Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm: clean up build variables

[Doug Goldstein <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 1/27/16 9:05 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> 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)
>>>>>  
>>>>>  $(TARGET): $(TARGET)-syms $(TARGET).axf
>>>>>   $(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.
> 

Oh sure. We can do that. Would you like me to send a v2 or are you
comfortable squashing that into the patch?

-- 
Doug Goldstein

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel