Re: [PATCH 02/23] x86, realmode: realmode.bin infrastructure

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:15:15PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 05/08/2012 12:14 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >>
> >> How much is needed to avoid this misuse of kernel-internal build rules?
> >> This was and is an ugly hack.
> >>
> > 
> > It is more or less the same as for arch/x86/boot and other things.  If
> > there are better ways to do it suggestions are very much appreciated.
> > 
> > However, it is a bit of a tricky bit because we need *some* of the bits
> > of the target compiler configuration and some not (this is the same as
> > arch/x86/boot etc.)  It is not "pure target" but it's also most
> > definitely not host.
> > 
> 
> Anyway... to answer your direct question: all of that would have been
> required anyway.  In therms of build rules the overall patchset is
> pretty much a lateral move from arch/x86/kernel/acpi/rm to
> arch/x86/realmode/rm.  That doesn't mean we couldn't do it
> better/centralize/etc; however, none of this is new and would be a
> separate change.

Agreed.
It just hurst my stummack big-time when KBUILD_CFLAGS are manupulated
in a "random" Makefile.
Last time we looked at this I failed to come up with something better.

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