2014-12-17 10:41, Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com] > > 2014-12-16 19:48, Thomas Monjalon: > > > 2014-10-28 15:48, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy: > > > > Fix: link combined shared lib using CC if LINK_USING_CC is enabled. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy at > > > > intel.com> > > > > --- > > > > mk/rte.lib.mk | 1 - > > > > mk/rte.sharelib.mk | 12 +++++++++++- > > > [...] > > > > --- a/mk/rte.lib.mk > > > > +++ b/mk/rte.lib.mk > > > > @@ -63,7 +63,6 @@ ifeq ($(LINK_USING_CC),1) > > > > # Override the definition of LD here, since we're linking with CC > > > > LD := $(CC) > > > > LD_MULDEFS := $(call linkerprefix,-z$(comma)muldefs) > > > > -CPU_LDFLAGS := $(call linkerprefix,$(CPU_LDFLAGS)) > > > > endif > > > > > > Why are you removing this line? > > > Hi Thomas, > > Basically the problem is when CPU_LDFLAGS has a value, which in the > currently only happens if we set CPU_LDFLAGS in the command line or > build i686 (setting CPU_LDFLAGS=-melf_i386). > In those cases, given the way the makefiles are being included,
These 2 files don't include each other. rte.sharelib.mk is included only in lib/Makefile and rte.lib.mk is included in each lib Makefile. I think the problem is not about how the files are included but how this variable is exported. CPU_LDFLAGS is modified in lib/Makefile via rte.sharelib.mk, then exported (see mk/arch/*/rte.vars.mk) then modified again in libs via rte.lib.mk. > CPU_LDFLAGS is being 'linkerprefixed' twice, resulting in build error. > Removing that line avoided the second linker prefix of the CPU_LDFLAGS > (note that we reset the original var instead of using a different var name). > > There probably is a better way but I could not see an straightforward fix for > it. I suggest 2 possible fixes: - do not export this variable (why is it exported?) - or do not override the variable, i.e. use a different variable for prefixing > I planned to improve the current build system (already sent an RFC) > and was waiting until 1.8 release to resume the work on it. I agree we should work on improvements after 1.8. > > If it's really needed, it could be another patch. [...] > > > > Applied without the change to rte.lib.mk. It definitely deserves another patch with a proper fix. -- Thomas
