From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755334AbXLFWgS (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2007 17:36:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751907AbXLFWgI (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2007 17:36:08 -0500 Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:37366 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751641AbXLFWgG (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2007 17:36:06 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 23:37:54 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Tejun Heo Cc: Linux Kernel , notting@redhat.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, kay.sievers@vrfy.org, greg@kroah.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] depmod: sort output according to modules.order Message-ID: <20071206223754.GB25209@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <47555AF1.8090304@gmail.com> <47555C64.8070607@gmail.com> <20071205072529.GA5681@uranus.ravnborg.org> <47565452.3010800@gmail.com> <47565486.8050701@gmail.com> <20071205190609.GA14997@uranus.ravnborg.org> <47573403.1060203@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47573403.1060203@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 08:28:03AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 04:34:30PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > >> Tejun Heo wrote: > >>>> It would also simplify the kbuild integration if depmod > >>>> could read the modules as a space separated list where > >>>> duplicates are allowed. > >>>> If we do so then the is no reason to escape to the shell > >>>> in Makeilfe.build and we do not have to remove duplicates either. > >>> I'm no Makefile expert so no doubt my modifications are ugly. But I > >>> think producing a file w/ duplicates in it is just ugly. > >> Oh, and, depmod should do just fine with duplicate entries as it is. > > What is the purpose of REMOVE-DUP then? > > If depmod handle duplicate entries there is no need to remove them. > > As I said, I don't think leaving duplicate lines in a file which will be > installed, distributed and used widely is the RTTD. There can be other > uses of the file. For example, the file can be parsed and modified by > distro specific module selector. Sure, all of them can be made to deal > with dup entries but that's just not the right place to solve the problem. googled a bit. It looks like: awk '!x[$0]++' does the trick. So we can skip the C file (good thing). > > > And this change in Makefile.lib seems bogus: > > +# make sure '/' follows subdirs > > +subdir-y := $(patsubst %//,%/, $(addsuffix, /,$subdir-y)) > > +subdir-m := $(patsubst %//,%/, $(addsuffix, /,$subdir-m)) > > Some subdir-y|m entries have following / while others don't. subdir-y|m > are lax about because either way it points to subdirectory. The above > two lines are to normalize them so that there's no surprises when > concatenating file name to it. I think it's a good idea to have the > above with or without other changes. With this change building modpost no longer worked so kbuild does not like the preceeding slashes. It could be fixed but thats another patch. > > > I commented it out and with my config everything seems to still > > work as expected. > > Yeah, it depends on config. If you don't have subdir-y|m entries which > don't have following '/', it will work just fine. If you do, it will break. > > > And I get scripts/mod/modpost built in a mrproper tree again (bug!). > > This I dunno much about. > > > subdir-y and subdir-m does not point to directories that > > contains modules (built-in or not) so they can be ignored for modorder. > > I didn't know that. Is it forced that modules can't be put in > subdir-y|m directories? What happens if I do that? I guess modules can be built as modules - but they can never be built-in. And if someone uses subdir-y to point to a dir with modules I would anyway cosider that a bug. Sam