Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 for-4.8] tools/libacpi: Fix compilation when cross building the tools

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 28.11.16 at 14:13, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> The tools (such as mk_dsdt) can be cross-built when it may not be
> desirable to build them on the target.
> 
> The commit c4ac1077 "libxl/arm: Generate static ACPI DSDT table"
> introduced support of ARM64 in mk_dsdt but also break cross-building
> tools because the ACPI tables are not correct.
> 
> While mk_dsdt should generate ACPI table for the target architecture, it
> currently generates the one for the host. This is because the source
> code contains reference to the host architecture (__aarch64__,
> __x86_64__, __i386__) when it should be the target architecture.
> 
> Replace all __aarch64__, __x86_64__, __i386__ by the corresponding
> CONFIG_*.
> 
> Also expose the CONFIG_* to the source code as the currently only
> exposed to the Makefile.
> 
> Reported-by: Andrii Anisov <andrii.anisov@xxxxxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

However, ...

> --- a/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c
> +++ b/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c
> @@ -17,9 +17,9 @@
>  #include <getopt.h>
>  #include <stdlib.h>
>  #include <stdbool.h>
> -#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
> +#if defined(CONFIG_X86)
>  #include <xen/hvm/hvm_info_table.h>
> -#elif defined(__aarch64__)
> +#elif defined(CONFIG_ARM_64)
>  #include <xen/arch-arm.h>
>  #endif

.. for this and at least some of the others I wonder whether from an
abstract pov these shouldn't be CONFIG_ARM. Agreed, it won't
matter as long as there's no use of ACPI on ARM32, hence my R-b
stands either way, but I'd like you to clarify whether it really should
go in this way.

Jan


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