On 04.06.2022 21:21:01, Vincent MAILHOL wrote: > On Sat. 4 June 2022 at 20:25, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > > On 03.06.2022 19:28:44, Vincent Mailhol wrote: > > > The canonical way to select or deselect an object during compilation > > > is to use this pattern in the relevant Makefile: > > > > > > bar-$(CONFIG_FOO) := foo.o > > > > > > bittiming.c instead uses some #ifdef CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMG. > > > > > > Create a new file named calc_bittiming.c with all the functions which > > > are conditionally compiled with CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMG and modify the > > > Makefile according to above pattern. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Mailhol > > > --- > > > drivers/net/can/Kconfig | 4 + > > > drivers/net/can/dev/Makefile | 2 + > > > drivers/net/can/dev/bittiming.c | 197 -------------------------- > > > drivers/net/can/dev/calc_bittiming.c | 202 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 4 files changed, 208 insertions(+), 197 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100644 drivers/net/can/dev/calc_bittiming.c > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/Kconfig b/drivers/net/can/Kconfig > > > index b1e47f6c5586..8f3b97aea638 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/can/Kconfig > > > +++ b/drivers/net/can/Kconfig > > > @@ -96,6 +96,10 @@ config CAN_CALC_BITTIMING > > > source clock frequencies. Disabling saves some space, but then the > > > bit-timing parameters must be specified directly using the Netlink > > > arguments "tq", "prop_seg", "phase_seg1", "phase_seg2" and "sjw". > > > + > > > + The additional features selected by this option will be added to the > > > + can-dev module. > > > + > > > If unsure, say Y. > > > > > > config CAN_AT91 > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/dev/Makefile b/drivers/net/can/dev/Makefile > > > index 919f87e36eed..b8a55b1d90cd 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/can/dev/Makefile > > > +++ b/drivers/net/can/dev/Makefile > > > @@ -9,3 +9,5 @@ can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += dev.o > > > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += length.o > > > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += netlink.o > > > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += rx-offload.o > > > + > > > +can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMING) += calc_bittiming.o > > > > Nitpick: > > Can we keep this list sorted? > > My idea was first to group per CONFIG symbol according to the > different levels: CAN_DEV first, then CAN_NETLINK and finally > CAN_CALC_BITTIMING and CAN_RX_OFFLOAD. And then only sort by > alphabetical order within each group. I was thinking to order by CONFIG symbol and put the objects without an additional symbol first > By sorting the list, do literally mean to sort each line like this: > > obj-$(CONFIG_CAN_DEV) += can-dev.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMING) += calc_bittiming.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_DEV) += skb.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += bittiming.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += dev.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += length.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += netlink.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_RX_OFFLOAD) += rx-offload.o ...which results in: obj-$(CONFIG_CAN_DEV) += can-dev.o can-dev-y += skb.o can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMING) += calc_bittiming.o can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += bittiming.o can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += dev.o can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += length.o can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += netlink.o can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_RX_OFFLOAD) += rx-offload.o > or do you mean to sort by object name (ignoring the config symbol) like that: > > obj-$(CONFIG_CAN_DEV) += can-dev.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += bittiming.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMING) += calc_bittiming.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += dev.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += length.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_NETLINK) += netlink.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_RX_OFFLOAD) += rx-offload.o > can-dev-$(CONFIG_CAN_DEV) += skb.o > > ? > > (I honestly do not care so much how we sort the lines. My logic of > grouping first by CONFIG symbols seems more natural, but I am fine to > go with any other suggestion). I think this makes it clear where new files should be added. Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |