* Matthias Kaehlcke <m...@chromium.org> wrote:
> El Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:20:54AM +0200 Ingo Molnar ha dit:
>
> >
> > * Matthias Kaehlcke <m...@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Ingo didn't like the duplication and suggested the use of a variable,
> > > which
> > > kinda implies a check for the compiler name.
> >
> > I don't think it implies that: why cannot cc_stack_align_opt probe for the
> > compiler option and use whichever is available, without hard-coding the
> > compiler
> > name?
>
> We could do this:
>
> ifneq ($(call __cc-option, $(CC), -mno-sse, -mpreferred-stack-boundary=3,),)
> cc_stack_align_opt := -mpreferred-stack-boundary
> endif
> ifneq ($(call cc-option, -mstack-alignment=3,),)
> cc_stack_align_opt := -mstack-alignment
> endif
The principle Looks good to me - but I'd make the second probing an 'else'
branch,
i.e. probe for a suitable compiler option until we find one. That would also
not
burden the GCC build with probing for different compiler options.
Please also add a comment in the code that explains that the first option is a
GCC
option and the second one is a Clang-ism.
> Since this solution also won't win a beauty price please let me know
> if it is acceptable before respinning the patch or if you have other
> suggestions.
This one already looks a lot cleaner to me than any of the previous ones.
Thanks,
Ingo
