[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56B99D55.2020301@bmw-carit.de>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 09:03:33 +0100
From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...tec.com>
CC: kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>, <kbuild-all@...org>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mips: Differentiate between 32 and 64 bit ELF
header
Hi Maciej,
On 02/08/2016 05:22 PM, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> [auto build test ERROR on v4.5-rc3]
> [also build test ERROR on next-20160208]
> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improving the system]
>
> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Daniel-Wagner/Differentiate-between-32-and-64-bit-ELF-header/20160208-234759
> config: mips-fuloong2e_defconfig (attached as .config)
> reproduce:
> wget https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git/plain/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
> chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
> # save the attached .config to linux build tree
> make.cross ARCH=mips
>
> All error/warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> arch/mips/kernel/../../../fs/binfmt_elf.c: In function 'load_elf_interp':
>>> arch/mips/kernel/binfmt_elfn32.c:38:7: error: implicit declaration of function 'mips_elf_check_machine' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> if (!mips_elf_check_machine(__h)) \
> ^
>>> arch/mips/kernel/../../../fs/binfmt_elf.c:536:7: note: in expansion of macro 'elf_check_arch'
> if (!elf_check_arch(interp_elf_ex))
> ^
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> --
> arch/mips/kernel/../../../fs/binfmt_elf.c: In function 'load_elf_interp':
Hmm how I was able to build binfmt_elfo32.o because it should suffer
from the same problem.
I think reusing mips_elf_check_machine() in binfmt_elf?32.c is only
going to work if we include arch/mips/include/asm/elf.h. Though this
looks kind of wrong.
Should I add a mips_elf_check_machine() to binfmt_elf?32.c as well or
just leave them as they are at this point?
cheers,
daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists