RE: [PATCH] ARC: build: Try to guess CROSS_COMPILE with cc-cross-prefix
From: Alexey Brodkin
Date: Mon Jun 03 2019 - 12:38:39 EST
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 7:25 PM
> To: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARC: build: Try to guess CROSS_COMPILE with cc-cross-prefix
> On 6/2/19 11:31 PM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> > For a long time we used to hard-code CROSS_COMPILE prefix
> > for ARC until it started to cause problems, so we decided to
> > solely rely on CROSS_COMPILE externally set by a user:
> > commit 40660f1fcee8 ("ARC: build: Don't set CROSS_COMPILE in arch's Makefile").
> > While it works perfectly fine for build-systems where the prefix
> > gets defined anyways for us human beings it's quite an annoying
> > requirement especially given most of time the same one prefix
> > "arc-linux-" is all what we need.
> > It looks like finally we're getting the best of both worlds:
> > 1. W/o cross-toolchain we still may install headers, build .dtb etc
> > 2. W/ cross-toolchain get the kerne built with only ARCH=arc
> > Inspired by  & .
> >  http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-snps-arc/2019-May/005788.html
> >  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=fc2b47b55f17
> > A side note: even though "cc-cross-prefix" does its job it pollutes
> > console with output of "which" for all the prefixes it didn't manage to find
> > a matching cross-compiler for like that:
> > | # ARCH=arc make defconfig
> > | which: no arceb-linux-gcc in (~/.local/bin:~/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin)
> > | *** Default configuration is based on 'nsim_hs_defconfig'
> > Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Not a big deal but I'd propose we add "Suggested-by: vgupta" since that is where
> it came from.
Ooops, indeed that should have been added, but instead I just
mentioned your earlier email in the mailing list.
Care to add yourself on patch application?