From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755740Ab2EHTPF (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2012 15:15:05 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:1073 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754835Ab2EHTPD (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2012 15:15:03 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="138330412" Message-ID: <4FA9709F.6020700@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 12:14:39 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sam Ravnborg CC: Jarkko Sakkinen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Michal Marek , Joseph Cihula , Shane Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/23] x86, realmode: realmode.bin infrastructure References: <1336501366-28617-1-git-send-email-jarkko.sakkinen@intel.com> <1336501366-28617-3-git-send-email-jarkko.sakkinen@intel.com> <20120508185349.GA12013@merkur.ravnborg.org> In-Reply-To: <20120508185349.GA12013@merkur.ravnborg.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/08/2012 11:53 AM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: +# How to compile the 16-bit code. Note we always compile for -march=i386, +# that way we can complain to the user if the CPU is insufficient. +KBUILD_CFLAGS := $(LINUXINCLUDE) -m32 -g -Os -D_SETUP -D__KERNEL__ \ + -DDISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING \ + -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes \ + -march=i386 -mregparm=3 \ + -include $(srctree)/$(src)/../../boot/code16gcc.h \ + -fno-strict-aliasing -fomit-frame-pointer \ + $(call cc-option, -ffreestanding) \ + $(call cc-option, -fno-toplevel-reorder,\ + $(call cc-option, -fno-unit-at-a-time)) \ + $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) \ + $(call cc-option, -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2) +KBUILD_AFLAGS := $(KBUILD_CFLAGS) -D__ASSEMBLY__ > > How much is needed to avoid this misuse of kernel-internal build rules? > This was and is an ugly hack. > It is more or less the same as for arch/x86/boot and other things. If there are better ways to do it suggestions are very much appreciated. However, it is a bit of a tricky bit because we need *some* of the bits of the target compiler configuration and some not (this is the same as arch/x86/boot etc.) It is not "pure target" but it's also most definitely not host. -hpa