* Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so...
@ 2004-02-29 23:51 Matthias Andree
2004-02-29 23:59 ` Måns Rullgård
2004-03-01 6:08 ` Sam Ravnborg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Matthias Andree @ 2004-02-29 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux-Kernel mailing list; +Cc: Linus Torvalds
Hi,
I've just seen, after a BK pull:
CC fs/nfsd/nfsctl.o
fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c:28:30: linux/nfsd_idmap.h: no such file or directory
This is a hint the dependency information isn't complete, otherwise, GNU
make would've "get"^Wgot the include file.
Will the kernel rebuild dependent files when includes change when this
information is missing? If so, how?
TIA,
--
Matthias Andree
Encrypt your mail: my GnuPG key ID is 0x052E7D95
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so...
2004-02-29 23:51 Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so Matthias Andree
@ 2004-02-29 23:59 ` Måns Rullgård
2004-03-01 6:08 ` Sam Ravnborg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Måns Rullgård @ 2004-02-29 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I've just seen, after a BK pull:
>
> CC fs/nfsd/nfsctl.o
> fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c:28:30: linux/nfsd_idmap.h: no such file or directory
>
> This is a hint the dependency information isn't complete, otherwise, GNU
> make would've "get"^Wgot the include file.
That's right. Running bk -r get before building is advisable.
--
Måns Rullgård
mru@kth.se
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so...
2004-02-29 23:51 Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so Matthias Andree
2004-02-29 23:59 ` Måns Rullgård
@ 2004-03-01 6:08 ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-03-01 17:52 ` Dave Dillow
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2004-03-01 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux-Kernel mailing list, Linus Torvalds
On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 12:51:50AM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just seen, after a BK pull:
>
> CC fs/nfsd/nfsctl.o
> fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c:28:30: linux/nfsd_idmap.h: no such file or directory
>
> This is a hint the dependency information isn't complete, otherwise, GNU
> make would've "get"^Wgot the include file.
>
> Will the kernel rebuild dependent files when includes change when this
> information is missing? If so, how?
kbuild scans for dependencies and build the output file in one go.
Therefore from a make perspective it will not see the new dependency of
nfsd_idmap.h when starting to compile nfsctl.c.
Dependencies are first OK after first kernel compile.
So if you tried twice the 'bk get' functionality should be OK.
Sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so...
2004-03-01 6:08 ` Sam Ravnborg
@ 2004-03-01 17:52 ` Dave Dillow
2004-03-02 18:07 ` Sam Ravnborg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dave Dillow @ 2004-03-01 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: Linux-Kernel mailing list
On Mon, 2004-03-01 at 01:08, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 12:51:50AM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:
> > Will the kernel rebuild dependent files when includes change when this
> > information is missing? If so, how?
>
> kbuild scans for dependencies and build the output file in one go.
> Therefore from a make perspective it will not see the new dependency of
> nfsd_idmap.h when starting to compile nfsctl.c.
>
> Dependencies are first OK after first kernel compile.
> So if you tried twice the 'bk get' functionality should be OK.
Also, the changesets at bk://typhoon.bkbits.net/autoget-2.5 add
functionality to kbuild to checkout needed files automatically, as the
build progresses -- no more 'bk get' needed...
I haven't kept it up to date, but I doubt it'd need many changes to work
with a recent kernel. It's currently BK/SCCS specific, but I do not
think it would be hard to make it work with other version control
systems, as long as make supports them.
Since you do so much in kbuild, I'd love some comments on it, if you
have time.
--
Dave Dillow <dave@thedillows.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so...
2004-03-01 17:52 ` Dave Dillow
@ 2004-03-02 18:07 ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-03-02 18:40 ` [PATCH 0/3] Auto checkout for kbuild Dave Dillow
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2004-03-02 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Dillow; +Cc: Sam Ravnborg, Linux-Kernel mailing list
On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 12:52:08PM -0500, Dave Dillow wrote:
>
> Also, the changesets at bk://typhoon.bkbits.net/autoget-2.5 add
> functionality to kbuild to checkout needed files automatically, as the
> build progresses -- no more 'bk get' needed...
>
> I haven't kept it up to date, but I doubt it'd need many changes to work
> with a recent kernel. It's currently BK/SCCS specific, but I do not
> think it would be hard to make it work with other version control
> systems, as long as make supports them.
>
> Since you do so much in kbuild, I'd love some comments on it, if you
> have time.
I have pulled the tree, and the getfiles script and Makefile.repo is easy to spot.
Could you drop a mail with the rest of your changes as a regular patch?
I will then try to look through what you made - but my first impression is that this
is by far too much overhead just to replace an "bk -r co -Sq".
Sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 0/3] Auto checkout for kbuild
2004-03-02 18:07 ` Sam Ravnborg
@ 2004-03-02 18:40 ` Dave Dillow
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dave Dillow @ 2004-03-02 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: Linux-Kernel mailing list
On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 13:07, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> I have pulled the tree, and the getfiles script and Makefile.repo is easy to spot.
> Could you drop a mail with the rest of your changes as a regular patch?
Here's three patches, in order. The first adds getfiles and
Makefile.repo. It will pull all files needed from BK, except for the
Kconfig files.
The second adds support for Kconfig files.
The third is just some comsetic cleanups to cut chatter during
non-verbose builds.
> I will then try to look through what you made - but my first impression is that this
> is by far too much overhead just to replace an "bk -r co -Sq".
There is a bit of overhead, but mainly for files that are not there. If
the file has already been checked out, and the SCCS file is not newer,
then getfiles will not be run. There is the matter of an extra stat()
call, though, to figure that out.
For me, since I am working in a NFS directory, this is much faster than
doing a "bk -r get; make bzImage" because it only pulls the files needed
to build my kernel configuration. Even on a local disk, it "feels"
faster, though I'm sure I do not see as much of a benefit.
Code wise, yeah, it is more overhead, and it could be potentially
fragile in regards to compiler messages in the getfiles script.
--
Dave Dillow <dave@thedillows.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-03-02 18:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-02-29 23:51 Is the 2.6 dependency information complete? Doesn't look so Matthias Andree
2004-02-29 23:59 ` Måns Rullgård
2004-03-01 6:08 ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-03-01 17:52 ` Dave Dillow
2004-03-02 18:07 ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-03-02 18:40 ` [PATCH 0/3] Auto checkout for kbuild Dave Dillow
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®