linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.24-rc1-82798a1 compile failure (x86

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20071107001159.GR26163@stusta.de>
Date:	Wed, 7 Nov 2007 01:12:00 +0100
From:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
	Thomas Bächler <thomas@...hlinux.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc1-82798a1 compile failure (x86_64)

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 09:32:23AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 03:02:17 +0100
> Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 01:11:49PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 11:04:36AM +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> > > > Thomas Bächler schrieb:
> > > > > 
> > > > > I just remembered, a friend of mine got it to compile with the
> > > > > exact same toolchain, but with a different configuration (which
> > > > > I don't have). He used a snapshot tarball from yesterday
> > > > > though, not the git tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I found the problem and eliminated it. While this is my own
> > > > fault, it is still a bug in either the kernel or the build
> > > > system: I had CFLAGS set to "-Wall -O3 -march=native -pipe". I
> > > > always thought the kernel would ignore those and set its own
> > > > CFLAGS, but I was wrong. Either the -O3 or the -march=native
> > > > break the build process on gcc 4.2.2.
> > > > 
> > > The kernel will now honour the users CFLAGS setting as you just
> > > discovered. The flags will be appended to the flags specified by
> > > the kernel.
> > >...
> 
> I think we can solve a ton of issues if we don't make the CFLAGS
> *append* but just *prepend*. That way, if the KConfig overrides a
> certain CFLAG, that sticks... since gcc picks the last one in case of
> conflicting options. That gives us both the honoring of cflags, and the
> principle of least surprise in that KConfig options are honored...

CFLAGS="-I/usr/include -I/usr/local/dist/include"

I think the solution with KCFLAGS that is in 2.6.24-rc2 is the best one.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
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/