From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753211Ab0BQRUs (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:20:48 -0500 Received: from s15228384.onlinehome-server.info ([87.106.30.177]:50705 "EHLO mail.x86-64.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753041Ab0BQRUq (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:20:46 -0500 Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:20:40 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Michal Marek Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kbuild , Borislav Petkov , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Wu Fengguang , LKML , Jamie Lokier , Roland Dreier , Al Viro , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , Ingo Molnar , Brian Gerst Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] bitops: compile time optimization for hweight_long(CONSTANT) Message-ID: <20100217172040.GC13429@aftab> References: <20100208092845.GB12618@a1.tnic> <4B6FDAED.9060204@zytor.com> <20100208095945.GA14740@a1.tnic> <20100211172424.GB19779@aftab> <4B743F7D.3090605@zytor.com> <20100212170649.GC3114@aftab> <4B758FC0.1020600@zytor.com> <20100212174751.GD3114@aftab> <4B75A66A.70005@zytor.com> <4B7BF5D6.3030701@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B7BF5D6.3030701@suse.cz> Organization: Advanced Micro Devices =?iso-8859-1?Q?GmbH?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2C_Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str=2E_34=2C_85609_Dornach_bei_M=FC?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?nchen=2C_Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrer=3A_Thomas_M=2E_McCoy=2C_Giuli?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?ano_Meroni=2C_Andrew_Bowd=2C_Sitz=3A_Dornach=2C_Gemeinde_A?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?schheim=2C_Landkreis_M=FCnchen=2C_Registergericht_M=FCnche?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?n=2C?= HRB Nr. 43632 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:57:42PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote: > On 12.2.2010 20:05, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 02/12/2010 09:47 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > >> > >> However, this is generic code and for the above to work we have to > >> enforce x86-specific CFLAGS for it. What is the preferred way to do > >> that? > >> > > > > That's a question for Michal and the kbuild list. Michal? > > (I was offline last week). > > The _preferred_ way probably is not to do it :), but otherwise you can > set CFLAGS_hweight.o depending on CONFIG_X86(_32|_64), just like you do > in arch/x86/lib/Makefile already. Wouldn't it be better if we had something like ARCH_CFLAGS_hweight.o which gets set in the arch Makefile instead? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. -- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating Systems Research Center