On 06.09.2021 12:06, Anthony PERARD wrote: > On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 12:08:58PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 24.08.2021 12:49, Anthony PERARD wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@citrix.com> >> >> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> >> albeit with a remark: >> >>> --- a/xen/Rules.mk >>> +++ b/xen/Rules.mk >>> @@ -133,6 +133,9 @@ endif >>> # Always build obj-bin files as binary even if they come from C source. >>> $(obj-bin-y): XEN_CFLAGS := $(filter-out -flto,$(XEN_CFLAGS)) >>> >>> +# To be use with $(a_flags) or $(c_flags) to produce CPP flags >>> +cpp_flags = $(filter-out -Wa$(comma)% -flto,$(1)) >> >> Afaics this has nothing to do with Linux'es cpp_flags, so what we do here >> is entirely up to us. If this is strictly intended to be used the another >> macro, wouldn't it make sense to have >> >> cpp_flags = $(filter-out -Wa$(comma)% -flto,$($(1))) >> >> here and then e.g. ... >> >>> @@ -222,13 +225,13 @@ $(filter %.init.o,$(obj-y) $(obj-bin-y) $(extra-y)): >>> %.init.o: %.o FORCE >>> $(call if_changed,obj_init_o) >>> >>> quiet_cmd_cpp_i_c = CPP $@ >>> -cmd_cpp_i_c = $(CPP) $(filter-out -Wa$(comma)%,$(c_flags)) -MQ $@ -o $@ $< >>> +cmd_cpp_i_c = $(CPP) $(call cpp_flags,$(c_flags)) -MQ $@ -o $@ $< >> >> ... the slightly simpler / easier to read >> >> cmd_cpp_i_c = $(CPP) $(call cpp_flags,c_flags) -MQ $@ -o $@ $< >> >> here? > > I don't think this is better or simpler. "cpp_flags" don't need to know > the name of the variable to be useful. I think it is better to know that > "cpp_flags" act on the value of the variable rather than the variable > itself, when reading "$(call cpp_flags, $(a_flags))".
Well, yes. This way one could also pass more than just the expansion of either of these two variables. The thing that made me think of the alternative is the comment: Would you mind if I inserted "e.g." in there, to make clear this isn't limited to these two variables? Jan
