[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       xen-devel
Subject:    [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 5 of 7] [OCAML] Minor makefile cleanup
From:       Zheng Li <zheng.li () eu ! citrix ! com>
Date:       2011-09-30 16:43:30
Message-ID: 4E85F1B2.2040506 () eu ! citrix ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hello,

On 30/09/2011 08:51, Ian Campbell wrote:
> What does the cleanup actually do?

IIRC, the patch meant to do 2 things:

* A small improvement (in two occasions)

E.g., for make rule

lib$(1)_stubs.a: $(foreach obj,$($(1)_C_OBJS),$(obj).o)

substitute the action part from

	$(call mk-caml-lib-stubs,$$@, $$+)

to

	$(call mk-caml-lib-stubs,$(1), $$+)

i.e. pass part of the target's name as the argument to mk-caml-lib-stubs instead of \
the whole name, so that we can avoid calling basename and sed later on to recover the \
sub string. I.e.,

from

	$(call quiet-command, $(AR) rcs $1 $2 && $(OCAMLMKLIB) -o `basename $1 .a | sed -e \
's/^lib//'` $2,MKLIB,$1)

to

	$(call quiet-command, $(AR) rcs lib$(1)_stubs.a $2 && $(OCAMLMKLIB) $(LIBS_$(1)) -o \
$(1)_stubs $2,MKLIB,$1)


* Some correction on linking parameters for bytecode mode compilation

IIRC, it's this line that changed from

	$(call mk-caml-lib-bytecode,$$@, -dllib dll$(1)_stubs.so -cclib -l$(1)_stubs, $$+)

to

	$(call mk-caml-lib-bytecode,$$@, -dllib dll$(1)_stubs.so -cclib -l$(1)_stubs \
$(foreach lib,$(LIBS_$(1)),-cclib $(lib)), $$+)

The former was able to produce bytecode as well, but there would be problem in \
dynamic loading the generated bytecode (e.g. in OCaml toplevel). The later version \
should work fine with the toplevel.  
> > -LIBS_evtchn = $(LDLIBS_libxenctrl)
> > +LIBS_eventchn = -L$(XEN_ROOT)/tools/libxc -lxenctrl
> 
> This should continue using LDLIBS_libxenctrl unless there is a good
> reason not too.

I think you are right. They are identical, only the name in the first line needs \
fixing, and using predefined $(LDLIBS_libxenctrl) is certainly better. The change \
dated back before your Makefile refactoring after Xen-4.1 and was probably a result \
of mix up during rebase.

Cheers
--
Zheng




_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]