[Buildroot] [Question] Including only needed makefiles?

[Yann E. MORIN]

Yamada-san, Thomas, All,

On 2016-02-17 09:11 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 13:00:26 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > I am not an active developer of Buildroot.
> > Apology if I am asking a silly question.
> Your question is not silly at all!

Indeed. No question is stupid. You're welcome to ask.

[--SNIP--]
> > [2]
> > If we achieve the perfect dependency in Kconfig,
> > perhaps can we include makefiles that are really
> > enabled by Kconfig?   For example, like this?
> > 
> > pkg-$(BR2_PACKAGE_BUSYBOX) += busybox
> > pkg-$(BR2_PACKAGE_LAME)    += lame
> > pkg-$(BR2_PACKAGE_GZIP)    += gzip
> >    ...
> > 
> > include $(addprefix packages, $(addsuffix Makefike, $(pkg-y)))
> 
> I propose such a change two years ago, see my RFC patch series at:
> 
>    http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2014-March/092548.html
> 
> The main complexity is that while target packages all have a Config.in
> options, it is not the case for host packages. And therefore, changing
> to a per package makefile inclusion requires adding lots and lots of
> Config.in options for host packages.
> 
> Another issue (explained in the cover letter) was that we could no
> longer use sub-directories in packages, such as
> package/qt5/qt5base/qt5base.mk.

Well, except with Yamada's proposal (or something similar), we could
explicitly manage the sub-directories, like so:

    pkg-$(BR2_PACKAGE_FOO) += foo
    pkg-$(BR2_PACKAGE_BAR) += sub-dir/bar

    -include $(addprefix packages/,$(foreach p,$(pkg),$(p)/$(notdir $(p)).mk))

Of course, that means explicitly listing all packages, instead of the
current glob-include. But sinc ewe're already explicitly source-ing
Config.in files, this would make it symetric for the .mk files as well.

> If you look at the feedback of the patch series, it was generally quite
> positive, but this needs more work, and is only saving a few seconds of
> make parsing, which are not such a big deal. So the effort is fairly
> big for limited savings.

Indeed, I don't believe the few startup seconds are that problematic.
Yes, they are annoying.

It takes roughly 3s on my machine (dual core-i5 with SSD), but I can see
that it could take quite a bit more on leww powerful machines,
especially those with rotating rust...

> I would personally rank implementing top-level parallel build at a much
> higher priority level than this micro-optimization.

Agreed.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'