mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Samuelson <peter@cadcamlab.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@caldera.de>
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kbuild@torque.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] list-style makefile boilerplate without reordering
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:03:23 -0600 (CST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <14848.12475.791640.17546@wire.cadcamlab.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20001101125837.A28861@caldera.de>


[Christoph Hellwig <hch@caldera.de>]
> +
> +# include a local makefile, if present
> +-include Makefile.local

Why?


> +%.i: %.c
> +	$(CPP) $(CFLAGS) $(EXTRA_CFLAGS) $(CFLAGS_$@) $< > $@

Why?  Well, I know, it's historical, but does anyone think we actually
need this?


> +%.s: %.S
> +	$(CPP) $(AFLAGS) $(EXTRA_AFLAGS) $(AFLAGS_$@) $< > $@

Ditto.


> +# Rule to compile a set of .o files into one .o file
> +$(O_TARGET): $(obj-y)
> +	rm -f $@
> +    ifneq "$(strip $(obj-y))" ""
> +	$(LD) $(EXTRA_LDFLAGS) -r -o $@ $(filter $(obj-y), $^)
> +    else
> +	$(AR) rcs $@ $(filter $(obj-y), $^)
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
We have just determined that this is empty.  I think it would be more
readable to say

        $(AR) rcs $@

The whole line is a clever hack to produce something in the event of an
empty list, and this makes it more obvious what is going on.


> +# this make dependencies (not that ...) quickly
> +fastdep: dummy
> +	$(TOPDIR)/scripts/mkdep $(wildcard *.[chS] local.h.master) > .depend
> +ifdef all-subdirs
> +	$(MAKE) $(patsubst %,_sfdep_%,$(all-subdirs)) _FASTDEP_ALL_SUB_DIRS="$(all-subdirs)"
> +endif
> +
> +ifdef _FASTDEP_ALL_SUB_DIRS
> +$(patsubst %,_sfdep_%,$(_FASTDEP_ALL_SUB_DIRS)):
> +	$(MAKE) -C $(patsubst _sfdep_%,%,$@) fastdep
> +endif

This needs rethinking.  I know this is how Rules.make does it, but
wouldn't it be faster to eliminate one level of recursion?

  fastdep: dummy $(patsubst %,_sfdep_%,$(all-subdirs))
  	$(TOPDIR)/scripts/mkdep $(wildcard *.[chS] local.h.master) > .depend
  $(patsubst %,_sfdep_%,$(all-subdirs)):
  	$(MAKE) -C $(patsubst _sfdep_%,%,$@) fastdep

Untested, but is there some reason that wouldn't work?  Order of
execution shouldn't matter to mkdep, right?


> +# a rule to make subdirectories
> +sub_dirs: dummy $(patsubst %,_subdir_%,$(subdir-y))
> +
> +ifdef subdir-y
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   ifneq "$(strip $(subdir-y))" ""


> +PDWN=$(shell $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(TOPDIR)/scripts/pathdown.sh)

I think invoking pathdown.sh is probably unnecessary, see below.


> +.PHONY: $(patsubst %,_modinst_%,$(subdir-m))
> +$(patsubst %,_modinst_%,$(subdir-m)) : dummy
> +	$(MAKE) -C $(patsubst _modinst_%,%,$@) modules_install
> +endif

This is the only case where $(PDWN) is needed, so IMHO we should just
supply it internally -- faster than a shell process:

   $(patsubst %,_modinst_%,$(subdir-m)): dummy
   	$(MAKE) -C $(patsubst _modinst_%,%,%@ modules_install \
	  PDWN=$(PDWN)$(patsubst _modinst_%,%,%@)/

Or, if that looks funny, we can initialize PDWN to '.' in
$(TOPDIR)/Makefile and use
       ...PDWN=$(PDWN)/$(patsubst _modinst_%,%,%@)


> +ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
> +ifdef CONFIG_MODVERSIONS
[...]
> +ifdef CONFIG_SMP

Eric Raymond won't like this.  He at one point was pushing for phasing
out and eliminating 'ifdef CONFIG_*' from makefiles so he could define
CONFIG_* to be 'n' as distinguished from ''.  I think it's a good idea.

   ifneq "$(CONFIG_MODULES)$(CONFIG_MODVERSIONS)" ""
   [...]
   ifneq "$(CONFIG_SMP)" ""


Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  reply	other threads:[~2000-11-01 15:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-11-01 11:58 Christoph Hellwig
2000-11-01 15:03 ` Peter Samuelson [this message]
2000-11-02 12:52   ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=14848.12475.791640.17546@wire.cadcamlab.org \
    --to=peter@cadcamlab.org \
    --cc=hch@caldera.de \
    --cc=linux-kbuild@torque.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®