Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 10:25:22 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To:     Zhangjin Wu <falcon@tinylab.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        tanyuan@tinylab.org, thomas@t-8ch.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] selftests/nolibc: customize CROSS_COMPILE for all
 supported architectures
Message-ID: <20230814082522.GA17212@1wt.eu>
References: <20230814071850.GC14322@1wt.eu>
 <20230814073854.13444-1-falcon@tinylab.org>
 <20230814082500.GB16761@1wt.eu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230814082500.GB16761@1wt.eu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 10:25:00AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 03:38:54PM +0800, Zhangjin Wu wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 06:05:03PM +0800, Zhangjin Wu wrote:
> > > > > I think that later I'll further extend XARCH with new variants to
> > > > > support ARMv5 and Thumb2, because we have different code for this
> > > > > and I continue to manually change the CFLAGS to test both.
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Ok, what about further add x86_64 as the default variant for x86 (like ppc for
> > > > powerpc)? and then it is able to only resereve the variables for x86_64. I have
> > > > prepared a patch for this goal in our new tinyconfig patchset, it will further
> > > > avoid adding the same nolibc-test-x86.config and nolibc-test-x86_64.config.
> > > 
> > > I'm confused, x86 already defaults to x86_64, it's just that it depends
> > > on the .config itself to figure whether to produce a 32- or 64-bit kernel.
> > > But for example it starts qemu in 64-bit mode. Am I missing anything ?
> > >
> > 
> > In kernel side, it is, but in our nolibc-test, we have added a copy of x86_64
> > for x86:
> > 
> >     $ grep -E "_x86" tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile 
> >     IMAGE_x86_64     = arch/x86/boot/bzImage
> >     IMAGE_x86        = arch/x86/boot/bzImage
> >     CROSS_COMPILE_x86_64    ?= x86_64-linux- x86_64-linux-gnu-
> >     CROSS_COMPILE_x86       ?= x86_64-linux- x86_64-linux-gnu-
> >     DEFCONFIG_x86_64     = defconfig
> >     DEFCONFIG_x86        = defconfig
> >     QEMU_ARCH_x86_64     = x86_64
> >     QEMU_ARCH_x86        = x86_64
> >     QEMU_ARGS_x86_64     = -M pc -append "console=ttyS0,9600 i8042.noaux panic=-1 $(TEST:%=NOLIBC_TEST=%)"
> >     QEMU_ARGS_x86        = -M pc -append "console=ttyS0,9600 i8042.noaux panic=-1 $(TEST:%=NOLIBC_TEST=%)"
> > 
> > With 'XARCH', the "_x86" copy of them can be simply replaced with such a line:
> > 
> >      # configure default variants for target kernel supported architectures
> >      XARCH_powerpc    = ppc
> >     +XARCH_x86        = x86_64
> >      XARCH            = $(or $(XARCH_$(ARCH)),$(ARCH))
> > 
> > And therefore, the future nolibc-test-x86_64.config is also enough for x86.
> > 
> > But I have seen the 'x86' exception in tools/include/nolibc/Makefile, just a
> > confirm on if this replacement is ok.
> 
> Ah I thought you meant the opposite, i.e. that ppc did map to powerpc
> that I was not seeing anywhere else. Yes we can probably do that and
> remove the x86-specific lines later.

by "later" I mean "further" in the file.

Willy