In preparation to do away with symbols-dummy, re-number the assembly and
object files used, for the numbers to match the next passes real output.
This is to make 0 available to use for what now is handled by
symbols-dummy.
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
--- a/xen/arch/ppc/Makefile
+++ b/xen/arch/ppc/Makefile
@@ -16,16 +16,16 @@ $(TARGET)-syms: $(objtree)/prelink.o $(o
$(objtree)/common/symbols-dummy.o -o $(dot-target).0
$(NM) -pa --format=sysv $(dot-target).0 \
| $(objtree)/tools/symbols $(all_symbols) --sysv --sort \
- > $(dot-target).0.S
- $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).0.o
+ > $(dot-target).1.S
+ $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).1.o
$(LD) $(XEN_LDFLAGS) -T $(obj)/xen.lds $< \
- $(dot-target).0.o -o $(dot-target).1
+ $(dot-target).1.o -o $(dot-target).1
$(NM) -pa --format=sysv $(dot-target).1 \
| $(objtree)/tools/symbols $(all_symbols) --sysv --sort \
- > $(dot-target).1.S
- $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).1.o
+ > $(dot-target).2.S
+ $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).2.o
$(LD) $(XEN_LDFLAGS) -T $(obj)/xen.lds $< $(build_id_linker) \
- $(dot-target).1.o -o $@
+ $(dot-target).2.o -o $@
$(NM) -pa --format=sysv $@ \
| $(objtree)/tools/symbols --all-symbols --xensyms --sysv --sort \
> $@.map----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> > To: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org> > Cc: "Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, "Julien Grall" <julien@xen.org>, "Stefano Stabellini" > <sstabellini@kernel.org>, "Anthony PERARD" <anthony.perard@vates.tech>, "Michal Orzel" <michal.orzel@amd.com>, "Roger > Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>, "Timothy Pearson" <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2025 7:43:17 AM > Subject: [PATCH 3/8] symbols/ppc: re-number intermediate files > In preparation to do away with symbols-dummy, re-number the assembly and > object files used, for the numbers to match the next passes real output. > This is to make 0 available to use for what now is handled by > symbols-dummy. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Looks good to me. Acked-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> > --- a/xen/arch/ppc/Makefile > +++ b/xen/arch/ppc/Makefile > @@ -16,16 +16,16 @@ $(TARGET)-syms: $(objtree)/prelink.o $(o > $(objtree)/common/symbols-dummy.o -o $(dot-target).0 > $(NM) -pa --format=sysv $(dot-target).0 \ > | $(objtree)/tools/symbols $(all_symbols) --sysv --sort \ > - > $(dot-target).0.S > - $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).0.o > + > $(dot-target).1.S > + $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).1.o > $(LD) $(XEN_LDFLAGS) -T $(obj)/xen.lds $< \ > - $(dot-target).0.o -o $(dot-target).1 > + $(dot-target).1.o -o $(dot-target).1 > $(NM) -pa --format=sysv $(dot-target).1 \ > | $(objtree)/tools/symbols $(all_symbols) --sysv --sort \ > - > $(dot-target).1.S > - $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).1.o > + > $(dot-target).2.S > + $(MAKE) $(build)=$(@D) $(dot-target).2.o > $(LD) $(XEN_LDFLAGS) -T $(obj)/xen.lds $< $(build_id_linker) \ > - $(dot-target).1.o -o $@ > + $(dot-target).2.o -o $@ > $(NM) -pa --format=sysv $@ \ > | $(objtree)/tools/symbols --all-symbols --xensyms --sysv --sort \ > > $@.map
On 26.11.2025 15:07, Timothy Pearson wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> >> To: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org> > >> In preparation to do away with symbols-dummy, re-number the assembly and >> object files used, for the numbers to match the next passes real output. >> This is to make 0 available to use for what now is handled by >> symbols-dummy. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > Looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> Thanks, but for clarification: This doesn't mean very much unless provided by a maintainer (M: in ./MAINTAINERS). As a reviewer, you'd use Reviewed-by: to fulfill the purpose set forth in the textual part of that file. Provided of course you actually did a review. Jan
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> > To: "Timothy Pearson" <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> > Cc: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, "Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, "Julien Grall" > <julien@xen.org>, "Stefano Stabellini" <sstabellini@kernel.org>, "Anthony PERARD" <anthony.perard@vates.tech>, "Michal > Orzel" <michal.orzel@amd.com>, "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com> > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2025 8:11:55 AM > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] symbols/ppc: re-number intermediate files > On 26.11.2025 15:07, Timothy Pearson wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> >>> To: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org> >> >>> In preparation to do away with symbols-dummy, re-number the assembly and >>> object files used, for the numbers to match the next passes real output. >>> This is to make 0 available to use for what now is handled by >>> symbols-dummy. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> >> >> Looks good to me. >> >> Acked-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> > > Thanks, but for clarification: This doesn't mean very much unless provided > by a maintainer (M: in ./MAINTAINERS). As a reviewer, you'd use Reviewed-by: > to fulfill the purpose set forth in the textual part of that file. Provided > of course you actually did a review. Understood, and yes, the patches were in fact reviewed. I will use the alternate string in the future.
On 26.11.2025 15:14, Timothy Pearson wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> >> To: "Timothy Pearson" <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> > >> On 26.11.2025 15:07, Timothy Pearson wrote: >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> >>>> To: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org> >>> >>>> In preparation to do away with symbols-dummy, re-number the assembly and >>>> object files used, for the numbers to match the next passes real output. >>>> This is to make 0 available to use for what now is handled by >>>> symbols-dummy. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> >>> >>> Looks good to me. >>> >>> Acked-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> >> >> Thanks, but for clarification: This doesn't mean very much unless provided >> by a maintainer (M: in ./MAINTAINERS). As a reviewer, you'd use Reviewed-by: >> to fulfill the purpose set forth in the textual part of that file. Provided >> of course you actually did a review. > > Understood, and yes, the patches were in fact reviewed. I will use the > alternate string in the future. Then still for the ones here: May I flip them to R-b, meaning the patches can in fact go in without anyone else's (i.e. a REST maintainer's) ack? Jan
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> > To: "Timothy Pearson" <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> > Cc: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, "Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, "Julien Grall" > <julien@xen.org>, "Stefano Stabellini" <sstabellini@kernel.org>, "Anthony PERARD" <anthony.perard@vates.tech>, "Michal > Orzel" <michal.orzel@amd.com>, "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com> > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2025 8:21:31 AM > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] symbols/ppc: re-number intermediate files > On 26.11.2025 15:14, Timothy Pearson wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> >>> To: "Timothy Pearson" <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> >> >>> On 26.11.2025 15:07, Timothy Pearson wrote: >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com> >>>>> To: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org> >>>> >>>>> In preparation to do away with symbols-dummy, re-number the assembly and >>>>> object files used, for the numbers to match the next passes real output. >>>>> This is to make 0 available to use for what now is handled by >>>>> symbols-dummy. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> >>>> >>>> Looks good to me. >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineering.com> >>> >>> Thanks, but for clarification: This doesn't mean very much unless provided >>> by a maintainer (M: in ./MAINTAINERS). As a reviewer, you'd use Reviewed-by: >>> to fulfill the purpose set forth in the textual part of that file. Provided >>> of course you actually did a review. >> >> Understood, and yes, the patches were in fact reviewed. I will use the >> alternate string in the future. > > Then still for the ones here: May I flip them to R-b, meaning the patches can > in fact go in without anyone else's (i.e. a REST maintainer's) ack? > > Jan Yes, for both the [3/8] and [4/8] patches which I have personally reviewed.
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.