On Sun, Jul 30, 2023 at 12:54:45AM +0800, Zhangjin Wu wrote:
Also I find it odd to use $(ARCH) here, I would have expected $(XARCH) since you probably want to distinguish ppc64 from ppc for example.
Yes, we do, but the XARCH and ARCH mmapping patch is the 4th, will update this to XARCH, this one is the 3rd one, do we need to add this one after the 4th one?
OK indeed it's the 4th one that will modify this one then, no need to reorder.
something like "make nolibctestconfig" to make an existing config ready for nolibc-test.
Do you mean rename 'defconfig' to 'nolibctestconfig'? or something nolibc-test-config:
nolibc-test-config:$(Q)$(MAKE) -C $(srctree) ARCH=$(ARCH) CC=$(CC) CROSS_COMPILE=$(CROSS_COMPILE) mrproper $(DEFCONFIG) prepare $(Q)$(srctree)/scripts/kconfig/merge_config.sh -O "$(srctree)" -m "$(srctree)/.config" $(foreach c,$(EXTRA_CONFIG),$(wildcard $(CURDIR)/configs/$c)) $(Q)$(MAKE) -C $(srctree) ARCH=$(ARCH) CC=$(CC) CROSS_COMPILE=$(CROSS_COMPILE) KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG="$(srctree)/.config" allnoconfig
It looks too long ;-)
I think that as long as we don't claim to call topdir's makefile targets from this directory, we can reuse some similarly named targets which are documented in "make help" and are non-ambiguous.
Seems 'nolibc-test-config' is really more meaningful than 'defconfig', especially when we want to use tinyconfig through it?
$ make nolibc-test-config DEFCONFIG=tinyconfigAs a user, I'd ask "why not make tinyconfig" ? But see my other message, now I'm having strong doubts about the relevance of tinyconfig if it works as bad as you described it.
I have added a nolibc tinyconfig target before, as the same reason, based on your suggestion, I have removed the tinyconfig target and even moved the extconfig to this defconfig to avoid add more similar or extra complex targets in nolibc Makefile. before, tinyconfig + extconfig together work for nolibc-test, so, tinyconfig is the same as the top-level one, it should be removed as your suggested.
But since now, we are ready to get a real different target from the top-level one, we may be able to have different targets for 'defconfig+EXTRA_CONFIG' and 'tinyconfig+EXTRA_CONFIG' like this:
nolibc-test-config: $(Q)echo $(MAKE_KERNEL) mrproper $(or $(CONFIG),defconfig) $(Q)echo $(srctree)/scripts/kconfig/merge_config.sh -Q -O "$(objtree)" -m "$(KERNEL_CONFIG)" $(foreach c,$(EXTRA_CONFIG),$(wildcard $(CURDIR)/configs/$c)) $(Q)echo $(MAKE_KERNEL) KCONFIG_ALLCONFIG="$(KERNEL_CONFIG)" allnoconfig $(Q)echo $(MAKE_KERNEL) prepare
nolibc-test-defconfig nolibc-test-tinyconfig: nolibc-test-config nolibc-test-tinyconfig: CONFIG=tinyconfig
The complexity here is we have planned to support both defconfig and tinyconfig, what about this solution?
Thanks, Zhangjin
Willy