From: Jiří P. <jpa...@we...> - 2009-03-02 19:38:26
|
On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:00:25 +0100, Michal Simek <mic...@pe...> wrote: > >> On Monday 02 March 2009 07:56:19 Michal Simek wrote: >> >>> I think that is the right time to start with arch dependent >>> compilation. >>> Here is the patch which solve my problem with hyperthreading >>> compilation. >>> >>> Mike: Any comments? If not I'll prepare proper patch for Subrata. >>> >>> --- a/Makefile >>> +++ b/Makefile >>> +ifndef ARCH >>> +ARCH=i386 >>> +endif >>> >> >> this is no good imo. the ARCH should either be discovered >> automatically, or >> not at all. >> > Arch should be discover automatically for systems where you compile LTP > but not when you cross compile on x86 for different arch. In that case, "not at all" applies. Also, the change you've posted raises several questions - why do you add a macro ARCH, that is generally not used in the LTP? - why resort to 386, and not x86-64, sparc or powerpc Also, the compiler really should set architecture spcific macros based on the target. >> >>> --- a/testcases/kernel/sched/Makefile >>> +++ b/testcases/kernel/sched/Makefile >>> +ifeq ($(ARCH),i386) >>> +SUBDIRS += hyperthreading >>> +endif >>> >> >> i thought the code already had #ifdef's in it you could fix up easily ? >> -mike >> > Some ifdefs are there but the question is why we should compile tests > which we don't need for non x86 arch. ... and the answer is yes, and the rationale is that we want that the tests not fail on non x86 architectures, and for this, we need the files to be there. > Ifdef which are there are only for i[3-6]86. This covered only cases > when you compile ltp on powerpc for powerpc test - that's work. > Adding more ifdef to code seems to me useless. Why would you need to add ifdefs? Does a simple s/ARCH_i386/__i386__/g not work for you? Regards Jiri Palecek -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |