[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070823113936.GB18456@skynet.ie>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:39:36 +0100
From: mel@...net.ie (Mel Gorman)
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: 2.6.23-rc3-mm1
On (22/08/07 11:10), Andrew Morton didst pronounce:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:17:38 +0100
> Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie> wrote:
>
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.23-rc3/2.6.23-rc3-mm1/
> > >
> > > - git-ixgbe.patch got dropped - git-net.patch destroyed it
> > >
> > > - then git-net got dropped as it doesn't work
> > >
> > > - the -mm import-to-git engine still isn't working
> > >
> >
> > >From elm3b6 on test.kernel.org, we get the following build error
> >
> > 08/22/07-07:01:07 building kernel - make bzImage
> > CHK include/linux/version.h
> > UPD include/linux/version.h
> > CHK include/linux/utsrelease.h
> > UPD include/linux/utsrelease.h
> > SYMLINK include/asm -> include/asm-x86_64
> > CC arch/x86_64/kernel/asm-offsets.s
> > arch/x86_64/kernel/asm-offsets.c:1: error: -mpreferred-stack-boundary=3
> > is not between 4 and 12
> > make[1]: *** [arch/x86_64/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error 1
> > make: *** [prepare0] Error 2
> > 08/22/07-07:01:08 Build the kernel. Failed rc = 2
> > 08/22/07-07:01:08 build: Building kernel... Failed rc = 1
> > Failed and terminated the run
> > 08/22/07-07:01:08 command complete: (1) rc=126 (TEST ABORT)
> > Fatal error, aborting autorun
> >
> > config file at: http://test.kernel.org/abat/107411/build/dotconfig
> > gcc version is 3.4.4
> >
> > This does not occur when using a cross-compiler gcc 3.4.0
> >
>
> x86_64-mm-less-stack-alignment.patch has
>
> cflags-y += $(call cc-option,-mpreferred-stack-boundary=3)
>
> So we _should_ have detected that gcc didn't like =3, so it
> should not have been used.
>
> I am suspecting a kbuild glitch: asm-offsets.c tends to be handled
> in special ways (ie: it's usually the thing which blows up first)
> so perhaps it is somehow avoiding the above does-gcc-support-this test.
>
> Suitable cc's added ;)
Reverting the patch does allow the kernel to build and boot on that
machine.
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists