[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [XEN PATCH v7 49/51] build: adding out-of-tree support to the xen build
On 18.10.21 12:36, Jan Beulich wrote: On 18.10.2021 12:28, Juergen Gross wrote:On 18.10.21 11:51, Anthony PERARD wrote:On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:02:20AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:On 15.10.2021 18:58, Anthony PERARD wrote:On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 12:14:29PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:On 24.08.2021 12:50, Anthony PERARD wrote:--- a/xen/Rules.mk +++ b/xen/Rules.mk @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ SPECIAL_DATA_SECTIONS := rodata $(foreach a,1 2 4 8 16, \ $(foreach r,rel rel.ro,data.$(r).local)# The filename build.mk has precedence over Makefile-mk-dir := $(src) +mk-dir := $(srctree)/$(src) include $(if $(wildcard $(mk-dir)/build.mk),$(mk-dir)/build.mk,$(mk-dir)/Makefile)Perhaps already when it was changed to $(src) the name has become slightly misleading, at least imo: I would rather expect a variable with this name to refer to the build dir/tree. Maybe "srcdir" or even shorted "sd" right from the start? (Reaching here I can finally see why having a shorthand is helpful.)I have to think about that. I've made some further progress in order to be able to build the Xen pvhshim without a link farm and notice that nearly every source file needs to use "$(srctree)/$(src)"Oh, now I'm curious as to the why here. I thought use of $(srctree) ought to be the exception.In Linux, the use of $(srctree) is indeed the exception. This is because we have VPATH=$(srctree), so when `make` look for a prerequisite or a target it will look first in the current directory and then in $(srctree). That works fine as long as the source tree only have sources and no built files. But if we want to be able to build the pv-shim without the linkfarm and thus using out-of-tree build, we are going to need the ability to build from a non-clean source tree. I don't think another way is possible.Is there any reason (apart from historical ones) to build the hypervisor in $(srctree)? I could see several advantages to build it in another directory as soon as the build system has this capability: - possibility to have a simple build target for building multiple archs (assuming the cross-tools are available), leading to probably less problems with breaking the build of "the other" architecture we are normally not working with (and in future with e.g. Risc-V being added this will be even more important) - possibility to have a debug and a non-debug build in parallel (in fact at least at SUSE we are working around that by building those with an intermediate "make clean" for being able to package both variants) - make clean for the hypervisor part would be just a "rm -r"I fully agree, yet ...Yes, this would require us (the developers) to maybe change some habits, but I think this would be better than working around the issues by adding $(srctree) all over the build system.... developers' habits would only be my second concern here (and if that had been the only one, then I would not see this as a reason speaking against the change, but as said I've never been building from the root, and I've also been building sort of out-of-tree all the time). Yet while writing this reply I came to realize that my primary concern was wrong: People would not need to adjust their spec files (or alike), at least not as long as they consume only files living under dist/. So, Anthony - thoughts about making the default in-tree Xen build actually build into, say, build/xen/? Or maybe even build-<arch>[-debug]/xen/? Juergen Attachment:
OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |