On 07.10.2024 12:00, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 10:47 AM Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On 07/10/2024 10:04 am, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 07.10.2024 10:15, Frediano Ziglio wrote: >>>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 9:07 AM Frediano Ziglio >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 8:03 AM Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On 05.10.2024 15:21, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>>>>> On 05/10/2024 9:02 am, Frediano Ziglio wrote: >>>>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/Makefile >>>>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/Makefile >>>>>>>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ >>>>>>>> -obj-bin-y += head.o cbundle.o >>>>>>>> +obj-bin-y += head.o cbundle.o reloc-trampoline.x64.o >>>>>>> Ah. I think the $(obj)/%.x64.o rule you had in the previous patch wants >>>>>>> introducing here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That said, x64 is the one name for 64bit that we reliably don't use. >>>>>>> Also... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -head-bin-objs := cmdline.o reloc.o >>>>>>>> +head-bin-objs := cmdline.o reloc.o reloc-trampoline.o >>>>>>> ... head-bin-objs isn't really correct now seeing as they're not >>>>>>> binaries in head.S. Also ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> nocov-y += $(head-bin-objs) >>>>>>>> noubsan-y += $(head-bin-objs) >>>>>>> The no$(foo)'s needs extending to the 64bit objects too. They're also >>>>>>> used early enough to explode. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In Xen, 64bit objects are the norm, and it's 32bit ones which are the >>>>>>> exception, so how about we special case *.i386.o instead. Then >>>>>>> >>>>>>> obj32 := cmdline.i386.o >>>>>>> obj32 += reloc.i386.o >>>>>>> obj32 += reloc-trampoline.i386.o >>>>>> I'd like to advocate for ix86 or i686. i386 gives a wrong impression imo. >>>>> Why not simply x86 ? We already use it. >>>>> >>>> Looking at current files, we also use (to distinguish more clearly 32 >>>> and 64 bit) x86_32. >>> Either would be fine with me; as to x86 I took it that Andrew wanted to >>> express the 32-bit-ness, which x86 alone doesn't unambiguously do. >> >> On further thought, why not just foo.32.o ? >> >> That should be clear enough. > > At this point, it starts to be more of a personal preference. > I slightly prefer x86_32 looking at file names and Makefile's macros. > Pick one.
I like Andrew's most recent suggestion, fwiw. Jan
