Re: [PATCHv2 00/36] perf tools: New build framework

[David Ahern]

On 1/15/15 5:54 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> Since it's actually small portion of kbuild that perf needs,
> I realized it's actually better to steal it than 'reconfigure'
> kbuild to be usable for perf.
>
> Also this patchset is kind of incremental version of the latest:
>    perf tools: Add kbuild support into Makefile.kbuild
> so it should be easier to review.
>
> NOTE I couldn't find any copyright/credit messages in the kbuild
> system, but would be happy to include it if someone suggests one.
>
> The stolen parts are in files:
>    Makefile.kbuild
>    Build.include
>
> The idea and more details are explained in the 'Documentation/Build'
> file. The basic idea is the same as in kbuild system, with some minor
> changes to allow for multiple binaries build definitions.
>
> User provides 'Build' files with objects definitions like:
>    perf-y += perf.o
>    perf-y += builtin-bench.o
>    ...
>
>    libperf-y += util/
>    ...

It is not obvious to me how this works. Users provide a .config file for 
building perf? Or do users provide Build files like you state above? If 
it is a .config file then what if a .config file is not present is it 
auto generated using the current autoprobing?

David


> and the build framework outputs files:
>    perf-in.o
>    libperf-in.o
>
> which are then linked into appropriate binaries/libraries.
> (perf libperf.a libperf-gtk.so)


--
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/