On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 7:34 AM Paul Menzel <pmen...@molgen.mpg.de> wrote: > > Dear Fāng-ruì, > > > Am 16.03.20 um 15:30 schrieb Fāng-ruì Sòng: > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 1:05 AM Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 10:52:56AM -0700, Fangrui Song wrote: > >>> ( > >>> depends on > >>> https://mail.coreboot.org/hyperkitty/list/seabios@seabios.org/thread/SWDV7MB6KSP2ZJF3SEVB3W3H3SOJMXEB/ > >>> "[PATCH] Makefile: Refactor cc-option" > >>> > >>> see linux/arch/x86/Makefile for a similar use case > >>> ) > >> > >> Better patch description please. You should also send the patches as > >> series, that'll take care of the dependencies, and you can also describe > >> the purpose of whole series, requirements and testing status in the > >> cover letter. > >> > >> Purpose seems to be to make seabios buildable with clang. A note about > >> the required clang versions would be useful. Building with gcc must > >> continue to work of course. Did you test that? Which gcc version? > > > > Most patches don't have a dependency. They can be applied in arbitrary > > order. This patch depends on "[PATCH] Makefile: Refactor cc-option" > > just because that patch removes $(CC) and this patch deletes a line > > without $(CC). > > > > This patch can be applied without "[PATCH] Makefile: Refactor > > cc-option" if ,$(CC) is added back. > > That is not the point. Please send at least patches depending on other > as series. This way developers can use the known tools (no mail archive > URLs), and you do not have to mention the dependency at all.
For this case, the dependency is really loose. "[PATCH] Makefile: Use -mstack-alignment=4 instead of -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 for clang" and "[PATCH] Makefile: Delete compiler driver option -nopie" refer to patch lines with ,$(CC) removed so they depend on "[PATCH] Makefile: Refactor cc-option" Do they still need to have a cover letter (0/3)? When I realize that -nopie should be deleted as well, it was a while after I sent out "[PATCH] Makefile: Use -mstack-alignment=4 instead of -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 for clang" > > I tested with GCC 9.2.1. Note that clang still does not build due to > > other reasons: > > > > (1) probable misuse of constraint code 'Q': > > (2) clang cannot handle a typeof on GNU expression statement > > extension. I haven't investigated whether it is a clang bug. > > Please do not mix topics. It’s better to start a new thread with a > descriptive subject line. > > > Kind regards, > > Paul -- 宋方睿 _______________________________________________ SeaBIOS mailing list -- seabios@seabios.org To unsubscribe send an email to seabios-le...@seabios.org
