[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081027040814.GQ28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 04:08:15 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <iwamatsu@...auri.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linux-sh <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdrom: Fix compile error
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:32:27AM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Return value and argument of block_device_operations.release of gdrom
> was changed.
> This patch fix this problem.
Serves me right for snide comments about the benefits of compile-testing ;-)
ACKed-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
FWIW, sh/sh64 is the only cross-toolchain needed for the kernel I hadn't
managed to build - 4.3.0 gcc manages to trigger internal error in sh64 as(1)
(2.18.50.0.6) and AFAICS the same should happen with any binutils up to
-HEAD (the minimal testcase is
.text
.LFB2:
.section .eh_frame,"a",@progbits
.quad .LFB2-.
and sh64 gcc4.3 routinely produces such things in its output). gcc trunk
seems to have arseloads of changes in gcc/config/sh and I hadn't got around
to attempting a backport ;-/
Are there any public sh/sh64 toolchains based on not too heavily hacked
gcc/binutils, ideally for more or less recent variants of both?
--
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