On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 10:08 AM Will Deacon <w...@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 09:59:43AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 9:47 AM Will Deacon <w...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 04:30:56PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > > In the long run, I wouldn't mandate CROSS_COMPILE_COMPAT to always be > > > > set for the compat vDSO since with clang we could use the same compiler > > > > binary for both native and compat (with different flags). That's once we > > > > cleaned up the headers. > > > > > > But we'll still need it even with clang so that the relevant triple can be > > > passed to the --target option. The top-level Makefile already does this: > > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Makefile#n544 > > > > That's not pulling the cross compiler out of a *config* (as this patch > > is proposing); rather from an env var. > > CROSS_COMPILE_COMPAT is the environment variable, right? If not, then I have > my terminology mixed up.
Ah, sorry, I'm the one misreading the patch. I thought the commit message was showing what the new process would be. I see now that it's describing the issue pre-patch. My mistake. > > > > so I think we should do the same thing for the compat vdso as well, which > > > would allow us to remove this complexity by requiring that > > > CROSS_COMPILE_COMPAT identifies the cross-compiler to use in exactly the > > > same way as CROSS_COMPILE does. > > > > > > Am I missing something here? > > > > I think the second paragraph you wrote shows we're all in agreement, > > but I suspect you may be conflating *how* the toplevel Makefile knows > > we're doing a cross compile. It doesn't read a config, this patch > > would make it so a cross compiler is specified via config, Catalin > > asked "please no," I agree with Catalin (and I suspect you do too). > > Yes, I'm saying let's have an environment variable only and drop the > CONFIG stuff completely. I think this means that the environment variable > must always be specified if you want the compat vDSO, but I don't see that > as a problem. > > Will -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
