[PATCH v2] x86: Remove libopcodes dependency

[H.J. Lu]

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 1:22 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On 29.11.2022 00:49, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 2:19 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> >> On 22.11.2022 19:19, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> --- a/gas/Makefile.am
> >>> +++ b/gas/Makefile.am
> >>> @@ -446,6 +446,12 @@ development.exp: $(BFDDIR)/development.sh
> >>>       $(EGREP) "(development|experimental)=" $(BFDDIR)/development.sh  \
> >>>         | $(AWK) -F= '{ print "set " $$1 " " $$2 }' > $@
> >>>
> >>> +$(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-init.h $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-tbl.h: \
> >>> +     @MAINT@ $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-opc.tbl \
> >>> +     $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-reg.tbl \
> >>> +     $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-opc.h
> >>> +     cd ../opcodes; make gen-i386-tbl
> >>
> >> I've made a patch to gas/Makefile.am as you have requested in reply to
> >> my series. I will want to put that through some more testing, so I will
> >> submit a v3 of that only a little later (and of course only unless you
> >> submit a v2 of your patch earlier that I would also end up being okay
> >> with). In the course of doing so I noticed a few more issues with your
> >> change:
> >>
> >> For one I don't think you can put @MAINT@ on a continued line, as the
> >> line continuation might then be hidden when @MAINT@ expands to #. The
> >> list of dependencies wants expressing via a variable, which would then
> >> be used immediately after @MAINT@ without any line continuation
> >> following.
> >
> > Fixed.
>
> No, the same problem is still there. You either need to use a very long
> line, or you need to introduce a variable holding the list of prereqs,
> like I've done in my series.

I got

$(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-init.h $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-tbl.h:
$(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-opc.tbl \
        $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-reg.tbl \
        $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-opc.h \
        $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-gen.c
        $(MAKE) -C ../opcodes gen-i386-tbl

and

$(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-init.h $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-tbl.h: #
$(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-opc.tbl \
        $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-reg.tbl \
        $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-opc.h \
        $(srcdir)/../opcodes/i386-gen.c
        $(MAKE) -C ../opcodes gen-i386-tbl

I didn't run into any problems.

> >> And then your rule / dependency won't be enough on a "maintainer-clean"
> >> tree, i.e. when the generated headers aren't there at all, and when
> >> config/.deps/tc-i386.Po is still empty. In that case nothing would
> >> trigger their generation; an explicit dependency of config/tc-i386.o on
> >> these headers needs adding here.
> >
> > Fixed.
> >
> >> Finally you're missing a dependency of the generated headers on
> >> i386-gen.c.
> >
> > They have a dependency on i386-gen which depends on i386-gen.c.
>
> In opcodes/, yes, but talk was about the rule in gas/. Yet despite
> your comment above I see that you've added the missing dependency.
>
> > Here is the v2 patch.
>
> As said in reply to v1 - my objection to this particular use of make
> recursion remains.

The gen-i386-tbl rule doesn't touch any files used by libopcodes.

> I also continue to be irritated by you specifically having asked me
> to further split my series, when you do everything in a single patch.

My patch is relatively small and it does only one thing.

> One further request at least for consideration: In my v3 I've moved
> the inclusion of opcodes/i386-tbl.h quite a bit further down in
> tc-i386.c, as I think it's preferable that way (not introducing the
> static arrays earlier than necessary).

Does it make any differences?


-- 
H.J.