On 25.11.2021 14:39, Anthony PERARD wrote: > @@ -81,10 +81,21 @@ ifeq ($(XEN_TARGET_ARCH),$(XEN_COMPILE_ARCH)) > > all: $(obj)/headers.chk $(obj)/headers99.chk $(obj)/headers++.chk > > -PUBLIC_HEADERS := $(filter-out $(src)/public/arch-% > $(src)/public/dom0_ops.h, $(wildcard $(src)/public/*.h $(src)/public/*/*.h) > $(public-y)) > +public-hdrs-path := $(srcdir)/public > > -PUBLIC_C99_HEADERS := $(src)/public/io/9pfs.h $(src)/public/io/pvcalls.h > -PUBLIC_ANSI_HEADERS := $(filter-out $(src)/public/%ctl.h $(src)/public/xsm/% > $(src)/public/%hvm/save.h $(PUBLIC_C99_HEADERS), $(PUBLIC_HEADERS)) > +public-list-headers = $(wildcard $1/*.h $1/*/*.h) > +public-filter-headers = $(filter-out $(addprefix > $(public-hdrs-path)/,$($1-filter)), $($1)) > + > +public-c99-headers := io/9pfs.h io/pvcalls.h > +public-headers := $(call public-list-headers,$(public-hdrs-path)) $(public-y) > +public-ansi-headers := $(public-headers)
Personally I find it odd for public-c99-headers to be first in this group. Further down, in the upper-case counterparts, you have it at the end (still in context below). > +public-headers-filter := dom0_ops.h arch-% What is the criteria to be listed here vs ... > +public-ansi-headers-filter := %ctl.h xsm/% %hvm/save.h > $(public-headers-filter) $(public-c99-headers) ... outside of that macro's expansion here? There's no other use of the macro that I can spot, so its presence is puzzling me. > + > +PUBLIC_HEADERS := $(call public-filter-headers,public-headers) > +PUBLIC_ANSI_HEADERS := $(call public-filter-headers,public-ansi-headers) > +PUBLIC_C99_HEADERS := $(addprefix $(public-hdrs-path)/, > $(public-c99-headers)) While benign right now, wouldn't it be more consistent if public-filter-headers was also applied in this last case? Or is there a reason not to? Jan
