[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Automatic dependencies are out of sync
>>> On 06.09.18 at 10:27, <jgross@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/09/18 10:10, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 06.09.18 at 09:34, <jgross@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I've setup a little example Makefile solving the problem (just to show >>> the correct dependencies, needs to be adapted for naming the .d and .d2 >>> files and how to build the .d2): >>> >>> -->8 snip here 8<-- >>> >>> DEPS := tst.d2 >>> >>> all: tst $(DEPS) >> >> -include $(DEPS) already ought to have the effect of such a dependency, >> since all makefiles are checked for rules of how to re-make them. > > Obviously this isn't the case. Otherwise there would be .d2 files more > common after doing a make. Well, be this (mis?)behavior is what needs explaining first. >>> %.o %.d: %.c >>> gcc -MMD -o $(patsubst %.c,%.o,$<) -c $< >> >> Doesn't this result in gcc to be invoked twice, perhaps resulting in >> corrupt .o and/or .d? I think %.d wants to depend on %.o, without >> a command. > > No, that's perfectly fine. make will invoke the command only once, its > just not clear for which target (that's the reason I need to use the > $(patsubst %.c,%.o,$<) instead of $@, which might be the .o _or_ the .d > file). > > From the make docs: > > Pattern rules may have more than one target. Unlike normal rules, this > does not act as many different rules with the same prerequisites and > recipe. If a pattern rule has multiple targets, make knows that the > rule’s recipe is responsible for making all of the targets. The recipe > is executed only once to make all the targets. Oh, right. But then there's no need to play games - just use $*. >>> %: %.o >>> gcc $< -o $@ >>> >>> -include $(DEPS) >>> >>> -->8 snip here 8<-- >>> >>> So the basic ideas are: >>> >>> - add a rule for constructing the .d files >>> - let the build depend on the .d2 files >> >> IOW I wonder whether this really is any different from what we >> do now (minus bugs/quirks in make itself, of course). And from this >> as well as your original mail I still don't understand what's actually >> broken with the current approach. > > The main problem is that the .d2 files used for determining which object > files need to be (re-)built are based on the build before the last one. > I'm not sure this is always the case, but at least when starting with a > clean tree I need two invocations of "make" to get all .d2 files built. But that's correct: They're not needed _until_ a rebuild happens. And by way of make's rebuilding of makefiles (if there are suitable rules) they should appear _before_ any .o gets rebuilt, and even before make evaluates which ones need rebuilding. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |