Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] build: Conditional build/clean/distclean targets on subsystems

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/05/2013 11:52, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 05/03/2013 10:53 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 09:43 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 08:15 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03.05.13 at 01:17, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> The commit 3378685 "Add conditional build of subsystems to configure.ac"
>>>>> allows the user to disable/enable some components of Xen. After this 
>>>>> commit
>>>>> some targets are still called on every subsystems.
>>>> For build this is correct to do, but for any clean target it isn't - clean
>>>> should remove leftovers from earlier builds even if there was an
>>>> intermediate reconfigure.
>>> Yes, I think so too.
>>>
>>>>> For Xen on ARM, the makefile targets build, clean and distclean will 
>>>>> failed.
>>>> If they fail, this will need fixing elsewhere then.
>>> Part of the issue is that there are targets which are simply not ported
>>> to  ARM and therefore are missing bits of infrastructure , e.g. mini-os
>>> where one if the clean failures is lack of
>>> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk.
>>>
>>> However I think it is wrong to tie the clean/distclean of these into the
>>> configurey selection mechanism, i.e. mini-os should know that it only
>>> support x86 (for the minute) and DTRT when called for ARM (which is
>>> likely to be nothing much). Perhaps a stub
>>> extras/mini-os/arch/arm/arch.mk is the answer?
>>>
>>> The other case is the kernel distclean, which fails with 
>>>         buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common:32: buildconfigs/src.: No such 
>>> file or directory
>>> but that seems to fail on x86 too. Having disabled it by default so long
>>> ago perhaps the time has come to simply remove this stuff? I don't know
>>> if anyone is still using it -- the test system perhaps?
>>>
>>> Or it could be fixed with the below, I think.
>>>
>>> Ian.
>>>
>>> 8<---------------------
>>>
>>> build: fix kernel build rules.
>>>
>>> Rename mk.linux-2.6-common to common.linux-2.6 so that it does not get
>>> included in the ALLKERNELS logic.
>>>
>>> Specify XEN_LINUX_SOURCE for linux-2.6-native, looking at 414614d84e67
>>> and todays linux-2.6-xen.mk I am guessing that hg-clone of the 2.6.18
>>> tree is the expected method. To be honest I didn't even try it...
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> NB git diff -M style diff, includes the rename...
>>>
>>>  .../{mk.linux-2.6-common => common.linux-2.6}      |    0
>>>  buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6                          |    2 +-
>>>  buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native                   |    3 ++-
>>>  buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops                    |    2 +-
>>>  buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest               |    2 +-
>>>  buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen                      |    2 +-
>>>  6 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> Ahem....
>>
>> 8<----------------
>>
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common b/buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> similarity index 100%
>> rename from buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> rename to buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6 b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
>> index 6b8d989..6523afb 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6
>> @@ -7,4 +7,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_CONFIG_UPDATE := buildconfigs/enable-xen-config
>>  
>>  EXTRAVERSION ?=
>>  
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native 
>> b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
>> index c7c0949..6e2a77b 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-native
>> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
>>  EXTRAVERSION = -native
>>  IMAGE_TARGET = bzImage
>>  INSTALL_BOOT_PATH = $(DESTDIR)/boot
>> +LINUX_VER    ?= 2.6.18
>> +XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
>>  
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops 
>> b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
>> index 59cae79..9a11c7d 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops
>> @@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= xen/stable-2.6.32.x
>>  
>>  EXTRAVERSION ?=
>>  
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest 
>> b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
>> index 2a0b9af..158dda0 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-tip-latest
>> @@ -14,4 +14,4 @@ XEN_LINUX_GIT_REMOTEBRANCH ?= auto-latest
>>  
>>  EXTRAVERSION ?=
>>  
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>> diff --git a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
>> index 8594b55..b1facb6 100644
>> --- a/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
>> +++ b/buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-xen
>> @@ -3,4 +3,4 @@ LINUX_VER    ?= 2.6.18
>>  
>>  XEN_LINUX_SOURCE ?= hg-clone
>>  
>> -include buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-common
>> +include buildconfigs/common.linux-2.6
>
> Hum in fact, it seems the build target doesn't work because
>
> make[3]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/arch/arm'
> gzip -f -9 < /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen > 
> /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz.new
> mv /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz.new 
> /local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen/xen.gz
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen'
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/xen'
> make -C tools build
> make[1]: Entering directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/tools'
> make[1]: *** No rule to make target `build'.  Stop.
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/local/scratch/julieng/xen-unstable/tools'
> make: *** [build] Error 2
>
> The target build is missing in tools build. So I guess nobody use it now.
> Is it possible to remove this target?
>

I did attempt to fix this before with
http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-08/msg00134.html

Please allow this to constitute a "ping" regarding the patch on that email.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel