From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 09:36:18 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] linux-tools/perf: Respect TARGET_CFLAGS In-Reply-To: <20190418114336.61f3f404@windsurf> References: <20190418093902.41835-1-abrodkin@synopsys.com> <20190418114336.61f3f404@windsurf> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 18/04/2019 11:43, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:39:02 +0300 > Alexey Brodkin wrote: > >> perf uses its own build-system and doesn't respect externally set flags. >> Let's force it to use target flags as perf utility is nothing but >> an ordinary user-space application. >> >> This among other things is required to build perf for ARC700 for which >> we pass "-matomic" via TARGET_ABI, see [1] for more details. >> >> [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1087471/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin >> --- >> package/linux-tools/linux-tool-perf.mk.in | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/package/linux-tools/linux-tool-perf.mk.in b/package/linux-tools/linux-tool-perf.mk.in >> index 80e00c3c56..e7565773c4 100644 >> --- a/package/linux-tools/linux-tool-perf.mk.in >> +++ b/package/linux-tools/linux-tool-perf.mk.in >> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ PERF_MAKE_FLAGS = \ >> JOBS=$(PARALLEL_JOBS) \ >> ARCH=$(PERF_ARCH) \ >> DESTDIR=$(TARGET_DIR) \ >> + EXTRA_CFLAGS="$(TARGET_CFLAGS)" \ > > The change is OK, but I believe that if -matomic is really a > core/important CFLAGS on ARC, then we should ideally pass it through > the toolchain wrapper, so that we are sure it is always passed. > > Arnout, what do you think? +1. Thomas, last year we made a beginning of deciding what should go through the wrapper and what through CFLAGS, but I'm not sure if we ever got to a conclusion? Regards, Arnout