Re: [PATCH] m32r: set CHECKFLAGS properly

[Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>]

On Sep 27, 2005, at 12:34:55, Al Viro wrote:
> *Hell*, no.
>     1) any use of cross-gcc is immediately b0rken
>     2) anything like building i386 on amd64 (native toolchain, -m32  
> in arguments) is b0rken

So s/gcc/$(SOME_MAKEFILE_VARIABLE)/g  I was simplifying for the sake  
of suggestion/example; adding in support for all of those is  
nontrivial and best left to those who thoroughly understand the  
kernel Makefile system (IE: Not me :-D).

>     3) way, way, *WAY* too much spew.  gcc pre-defines shitloads of  
> stuff and some of that stuff very definitely should not be there  
> for sparse.

Why not?  Some of that stuff may get used in kernel headers, which  
sparse should definitely have defined.  Besides, sparse is designed  
to check C source code, which will be compiled with said GCC using  
those preprocessing defines.  Why should it use a different set of  
defines?

> IOW, it's not that simple.  You need final CC, CFLAGS and CPPFLAGS  
> for that.

See responses to (1) and (2)

> Moreover, your variant won't do at all - change .config and you  
> might need to rebuild that file on biarch platforms (parisc and  
> s390 at the very least; ppc/ppc64 are also moving in that direction).

We do far worse messes in per-arch Makefiles, and this seems  
reasonably easy to put in an arch-generic makefile, unless there is  
some significant complication you didn't mention.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

--
I have yet to see any problem, however complicated, which, when you  
looked at it in the right way, did not become still more complicated.
  -- Poul Anderson



-
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/