On Sun, Sep 01, 2024 at 08:00:30PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Hi Jason, > > Le 01/09/2024 à 15:22, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit : > > Hi Christophe, > > > > Hmm, I'm not so sure I like this very much. I think it's important for > > these tests to fail when an arch tries to hook up the function to the > > vDSO, but it's still not exported for some reason. This also regresses > > the ARCH=x86_64 vs ARCH=x86 thing, which SRCARCH fixes. > > > > What about, instead, something like below, replacing the other commit? > > I need to look at it in more details and perfom a test, but after first > look I can't figure out how it would work. > > When I build selftests, > > to build 32 bits selftests I do: > > make ARCH=powerpc CROSS_COMPILE=ppc-linux- > > to build a 64 bits BE selftests I do: > > make ARCH=powerpc CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc64-linux- > > to build a 64 bits LE selftests I do: > > make ARCH=powerpc CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc64le-linux- > > > I addition, in case someone does the build on a native platform directly, > > On 32 bits, uname -m returns 'ppc' > On 64 bits, uname -m returns 'ppc64' > On 64 bits little endian, uname -m returns 'ppc64le' > > How would this fit in the logic where IIUC you just remove '_64' from > 'x86_64' to get 'x86'
Huh? That's not what tools/scripts/Makefile.arch does.
