Re: [PATCH] [net-next] net/mlx5: include wq.o in non-ethernet build for FPGA

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Saeed Mahameed
<saeedm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 8:58 PM, Ilan Tayari <ilant@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/Makefile
>>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/Makefile
>>>> index ca367445f864..50fe9e3c5dc2 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/Makefile
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/Makefile
>>>> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ mlx5_core-y :=        main.o cmd.o debugfs.o fw.o eq.o uar.o
>>>> pagealloc.o \
>>>>  mlx5_core-$(CONFIG_MLX5_ACCEL) += accel/ipsec.o
>>>>
>>>>  mlx5_core-$(CONFIG_MLX5_FPGA) += fpga/cmd.o fpga/core.o fpga/conn.o
>>>> fpga/sdk.o \
>>>> -             fpga/ipsec.o
>>>> +             fpga/ipsec.o wq.o
>>>
>>> I believe we would prefer to move wq.o to mlx5_core-y.
>>> Otherwise you might build it twice.
>>
>> That's not a problem, Kbuild is smart enough to drop duplicate object files
>> that get built into the same module.
>>
>> If you think it's less confusing to readers of this file if it gets
>> put into core,
>> that's fine though, the only downside would be adding a little bit of
>> code bloat for users that want neither the ethernet nor the fpga code
>> (if that is a realistic use case).
>
> Hi Arnd,
>
> Thanks for the patch, your solution is good enough, but let's avoid
> confusing developers with such duplications.
> since the Makefile might get messy if we will keep using this method.
>
> I suggest to move wq.o to core or make MLX5_FPGA depend on MLX5_CORE_EN.
> I will discuss this with Ilan and we will provide the fix ASAP.

Ok, sounds good. Thanks!

    Arnd