From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEAFCC44A for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 10:59:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from was59-1-82-226-113-214.fbx.proxad.net ([82.226.113.214] helo=[192.168.0.10]) by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bG0WL-0003WR-BX; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:01:57 +0200 To: Bruce Richardson References: <191edb8105649612fab5f0e691f587715b78e664.1466595242.git.pmatilai@redhat.com> <293319946.9flpxUKHBY@xps13> <576A7D20.4030801@6wind.com> <1598312.eZ7tuG1m5F@xps13> <576AAF95.7040906@6wind.com> <20160623085356.GB10864@bricha3-MOBL3> Cc: Thomas Monjalon , Panu Matilainen , dev@dpdk.org, cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com, zhuangwj@gmail.com From: Olivier Matz Message-ID: <576BA4EF.9040306@6wind.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 10:59:27 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160623085356.GB10864@bricha3-MOBL3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] port: fix build when KNI support is not enabled X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 08:59:35 -0000 Hi Bruce, On 06/23/2016 10:53 AM, Bruce Richardson wrote: >>> If we want to specifically build this directory, why preventing us to do >>> so with CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PORT? >> >> If we call foo_sub with CONFIG_FOO=n, it will generate a library and >> install headers in the build directory, however the config is unset. >> Some propositions if we want to replace >> DEPDIRS-$(CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PORT) by DEPDIRS-y: >> >> 1/ say that "make foo_sub" should be used with care, only if CONFIG_FOO >> is set (else it is not supported) -> nothing to do >> 2/ fix the make %_sub feature to browse parent directories, checking >> the SUBDIRS-${CONFIG_FOO} >> 3/ remove the make %_sub feature, maybe nobody cares... >> >> I think 1/ is acceptable. > > +1 > > Especially given the fact I wasn't even aware that you could do that (building > just one subdir). Do we have a usecase where people might want to build just one > DPDK subdirectory? The only use-case I see is to gain few seconds when recompiling: it can avoid to check deps in all directories if you know that your modifications only take place in a specific directory. Well, nothing really essential ;)