On 23.05.2023 18:38, Anthony PERARD wrote: > This is a preparatory patch. A future patch will not even use > $(CFLAGS) to seed $(XEN_CFLAGS). > > Signed-off-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@citrix.com>
Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> I have a question though, albeit not directly related to this patch: > --- a/xen/Makefile > +++ b/xen/Makefile > @@ -259,6 +259,7 @@ export KBUILD_DEFCONFIG := $(ARCH)_defconfig > export XEN_TREEWIDE_CFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) > > XEN_AFLAGS = > +XEN_CFLAGS = $(CFLAGS) > > # CLANG_FLAGS needs to be calculated before calling Kconfig > ifneq ($(shell $(CC) --version 2>&1 | head -n 1 | grep clang),) > @@ -284,7 +285,7 @@ CLANG_FLAGS += $(call or,$(t1),$(t2),$(t3)) > endif > > CLANG_FLAGS += -Werror=unknown-warning-option > -CFLAGS += $(CLANG_FLAGS) > +XEN_CFLAGS += $(CLANG_FLAGS) > export CLANG_FLAGS > endif > > @@ -293,7 +294,7 @@ ifeq ($(call ld-ver-build-id,$(LD)),n) > XEN_LDFLAGS_BUILD_ID := > XEN_HAS_BUILD_ID := n > else > -CFLAGS += -DBUILD_ID > +XEN_CFLAGS += -DBUILD_ID > XEN_TREEWIDE_CFLAGS += -DBUILD_ID Is this redundancy necessary? IOW can't XEN_CFLAGS, at an appopriate place, simply have $(XEN_TREEWIDE_CFLAGS) appended? Apart from this the same process question again: Is this independent of earlier patches (except the immediately preceding one), and could hence - provided arch maintainer acks arrive - go in ahead of time? Jan
