linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
To: Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas@fjasle.eu>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	keyrings@vger.kernel.org, DTML <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] config: Allow kernel installation packaging to override pkg-config
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 16:42:57 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNATmPXs6f-Oe4XmfcZSRPsCsuexSebA=4-jyNsMYHu9cag@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YjFQvhv7I6w8xjbK@google.com>

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 11:51 AM Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com> wrote:
>
> Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 01:01:45PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 7:50 AM Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 10:17:17AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 2:39 PM Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Add HOSTPKG_CONFIG to allow tooling that builds the kernel to override
> > > > > what pkg-config and parameters are used.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, kind a late thought here for v4, but we don't seem to prefix
> > > > many other host side tools with HOST_, i.e. LEX, YACC, AWK, PERL,
> > > > PYTHON3, etc.  Maybe just having the variable identifier be simply
> > > > PKGCONFIG rather than HOSTPKG_CONFIG then put it at the end of the
> > > > list in the top level Makefile after ZSTD (i.e. the list of host
> > > > tools)?  There's HOST_ prefixes when there's more than one tool
> > > > involved (i.e. host compiler vs target compiler), but I suspect
> > > > there's no such distinction for the existing uses of pkg-config?
> > > >
> > > Thanks for your suggestion, Nick! Yes I think it makes sense with PKGCONFIG
> > > instead of HOSTPKG_CONFIG since there is only one tool involved. I will
> > > work on it and submit a new patch.
> > >
> >
> > Please hold on.
> >
> > I was also wondering what to do with the "HOST" prefix.
> >
> > Libraries are usually arch-dependent.
> > (in other words, pkg-config should return different library paths
> > for $(CC) and $(HOSTCC) )
> >
> > You already understood this, so you added "HOST" prefix.
> >
> >
> > Please let me take time for further discussion.
> > I will come back to this when I get some time.
> >
> >
>
> Hi Mashiro,
>
> I was wondering if you were able to look more into this.
>
> Thank you!
>
> -CT
>
> > In the meantime,
> >   a8a5cd8b472ca20e5b8fa649c43b3756867322f8
> > as reference info if you have not seen it.
> >
> >
> > How many distros support something like
> > "aarch64-linux-gnu-pkg-config"  ?
> >
> > Ubuntu 18.04 and 20.04 seem to support it.
> > I do not know for others.
> >
> >
> >
> >



Sorry for the delay.
I am OK with the idea of allowing users to override the pkg-config command,
but I tend to take time before making a decision.




Does anybody have any insight / thoughts about the following points?






[Q1]   with/without "HOST" prefix


Apparently, "pkg-config" should return different libs/cflags
for $(CC) and $(HOSTCC).

I think the non-prefixed macro name "PKG_CONFIG" should be
reserved for $(CC)  (building for the target system).

"HOSTPKG_CONFIG" looks unbalanced
due to the underscore.

Perhaps, "HOST_PKG_CONFIG" might be better?




[Q2]    "pkg-config" vs "pkgconf"

The traditional pkg-config implementation [1] is not actively
maintained these days.
The last commit was more than one year ago.

The alternative one 'pkgconf' [2] is more active.

In fact, Fedora already switched to 'pkgconf' [3].
Now 'pkg-config' is just a wrapper of 'pkgconf'.
Many distributions already support pkgconf.


I considered the shorter macro name "HOSTPKGCONF" and

   HOSTPKGCONF  = pkgconf

but I am not sure if this is the right decision.
Maybe we should stick to "PKG_CONFIG" / "HOST_PKG_CONFIG"
for the macro names.


  [1]  https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/pkg-config/pkg-config.git
  [2]  https://github.com/pkgconf/pkgconf.git
  [3]  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/pkgconf_as_system_pkg-config_implementation





[Q3] What is the trend of handling cross-compile by pkg-config (or pkgconf).


By default, pkg-config returns the libs/cflags for native builds.

For cross builds, the search paths for the *.pc files must be changed
via the "PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR" environment variable.

To ease this, some distributions provide  <triplet>-pkg-config
(for example,   aarch64-linux-gnu-pkg-config).
This became the nationale for tools/build/feature/Makefile defining:

   PKG_CONFIG ?= $(CROSS_COMPILE)pkg-config

But, this wrapper shell script is not always available.
I do not know how to do it with the LLVM tool suite.
I am not quite sure if this is the global solution.


These days, pkgconf supports another way, .personality file [4]
to specify the .pc search paths for cross builds.

Is it reasonable to use an option to distinguish native / cross builds
and use the same macro   "PKG_CONFIG = pkg-config" everywhere ?


[4] http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/focal/en/man5/pkgconf-personality.5.html

  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-22  7:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-06 22:30 [PATCH v4] config: Allow kernel installation packaging to override pkg-config Chun-Tse Shao
2022-03-07 18:17 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-03-07 22:50   ` Chun-Tse Shao
2022-03-08  4:01     ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-03-08  5:26       ` Chun-Tse Shao
2022-03-16  2:51       ` Chun-Tse Shao
2022-03-22  7:42         ` Masahiro Yamada [this message]
2022-03-22 17:19           ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-03-22 20:21             ` Chun-Tse Shao
2022-03-31 21:58               ` Chun-Tse Shao
2022-04-01 14:42                 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-04-01 23:42                   ` Chun-Tse Shao

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAK7LNATmPXs6f-Oe4XmfcZSRPsCsuexSebA=4-jyNsMYHu9cag@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=masahiroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=ctshao@google.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=nicolas@fjasle.eu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).