Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f3d0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id a16csp445271pxv; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 01:25:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxMQINXxRHMm/U5GVXNI61URzbSzAVj9RwRT4Z7J3PMKvq3FP+riZm9VqZ0X+CMNS33vMal X-Received: by 2002:a92:8712:: with SMTP id m18mr10714229ild.132.1625819157842; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 01:25:57 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1625819157; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=yFNdnkpaFNZ4tHji2l8w3QpWE5F9jpC6DQFp4r7t1U7BjTl3oTkMJc3m3rMlJxsFuY uXJEQd98gvu6bq3YF1/B8BGfUDho8rQ3YBRgNhf9x9zqmU7cW6bcVcD5D3ljuc+6Zg2Q lh1b6kaLOF8euhSZYxF05iuoh92pbWvGQ0+e4wzTUs28Uv0BdWRwkcIiTtOxvMi4Jytg TN2HHSWQTsmR8qDz8DFG/PoHRV9iCOd+K03h742meYBfkZLZEpHfrDRCvuBlqr9Zd9cu 0P2g+WcRADSXm8uasDCG9+xhHENXlu6ERNbySBsSxGE+gU513q2UEiobocg2mX8YjKK7 KgJg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:message-id :date:subject:cc:to:from; bh=9tMvzypqzCuN3+l+GTXzc2X/PkDVAZOnB7r+h3+Dw7g=; b=ILR8JGNZMbfljq8cYTps1CcLr2oNP67dftmS31aSmbAJ24IO6Ji/sjlvGM/qrylf7u ZTuT8oOadSTigLaJO0MEz9dS3KVWDwbSXg81gsW2ovOeDhjQ0NZi8lWe4GdQ41yXERF/ B2rXVTXbSaMfNFpvApovEv36ZC5JuU8e5QEY+KybpJV1UF/dPmGldz+YN4XA5rsxA4v2 oC2v53IKl9d8NEFBN7jD77iOAwZNPYvADAdbkjJ7K1IhfC/niM2JUHPOu6g0XKLkuhDd XsUJwMyld7aqzUEF1k6Xu4vU7EZTpoNAx+QscwCwMQRdtNTvhYCBfVyOI3ZXXkZ/Jmnt ph9A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=mediatek.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w5si4756517ill.8.2021.07.09.01.25.45; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 01:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=mediatek.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231430AbhGII2A (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 9 Jul 2021 04:28:00 -0400 Received: from mailgw02.mediatek.com ([210.61.82.184]:51002 "EHLO mailgw02.mediatek.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229685AbhGII2A (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2021 04:28:00 -0400 X-UUID: e2fa50fcf82b4f31a3406b086a65e148-20210709 X-UUID: e2fa50fcf82b4f31a3406b086a65e148-20210709 Received: from mtkcas10.mediatek.inc [(172.21.101.39)] by mailgw02.mediatek.com (envelope-from ) (Generic MTA with TLSv1.2 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 256/256) with ESMTP id 54868000; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:25:13 +0800 Received: from mtkcas10.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.39) by mtkmbs05n1.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:25:12 +0800 Received: from mtksdccf07.mediatek.inc (172.21.84.99) by mtkcas10.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:25:12 +0800 From: Lecopzer Chen To: CC: , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Kbuild: lto: add CONFIG_MAKE_VERSION Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:25:12 +0800 Message-ID: <20210709082512.25208-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.18.0 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-MTK: N Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 2:06 AM Lecopzer Chen wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 7:03 PM Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 12:29 PM Lecopzer Chen > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > To check the GNU make version. Used by the LTO Kconfig. > > > > > > > > > > LTO with MODVERSIONS will fail in generating correct CRC because > > > > > the makefile rule doesn't work for make with version 3.8X.[1] > > > > > > > > > > Thus we need to check make version during selecting on LTO Kconfig. > > > > > Add CONFIG_MAKE_VERSION which means MAKE_VERSION in canonical digits > > > > > for arithmetic comparisons. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210616080252.32046-1-lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com/ > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lecopzer Chen > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > NACK. > > > > > > > > "Let's add MAKE_VERSION >= 40200 restriction > > > > just because I cannot write correct code that > > > > works for older Make" is a horrible idea. > > > > > > > > Also, Kconfig is supposed to check the compiler > > > > (or toolchains) capability, not host tool versions. > > > > > > I feel like requiring a Make that's half a decade old for a feature > > > that also requires a toolchain released last October ago isn't > > > entirely unreasonable. > > > > > > That being said, if Masahiro prefers not to rely on the wildcard > > > function's behavior here, which is a reasonable request, we could > > > simply use the shell to test for the file's existence: > > > > > > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.build b/scripts/Makefile.build > > > index 34d257653fb4..c6bd62f518ff 100644 > > > --- a/scripts/Makefile.build > > > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.build > > > @@ -388,7 +388,7 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_LTO_CLANG) $(CONFIG_MODVERSIONS),y y) > > > cmd_update_lto_symversions = \ > > > rm -f $@.symversions \ > > > $(foreach n, $(filter-out FORCE,$^), \ > > > - $(if $(wildcard $(n).symversions), \ > > > + $(if $(shell test -s $(n).symversions && echo y), \ > > > ; cat $(n).symversions >> $@.symversions)) > > > else > > > cmd_update_lto_symversions = echo >/dev/null > > > > > > This is not quite as efficient as using wildcard, but should work with > > > older Make versions too. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > I've tested this in both make-4.3 and 3.81, and the CRC is correct. > > But I'm not sure if anyone would have the "arg list too long" issue. > > > > Tested-by: Lecopzer Chen > > Thank you for testing. This should produce a command identical to the > wildcard version (with newer Make versions), so that shouldn't be an > issue. If nobody objects to this approach, would you mind putting this > into a proper patch and sending it as v4? Sure, I'll rebase the whole commit and send as v4 soon.