linux-kernel - Re: avr32 build failures in linux-next

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

Message-ID: <56E0FE58.8070503@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 Mar 2016 10:25:52 +0530
From:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:	Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Hans-Christian Noren Egtvedt <egtvedt@...fundet.no>,
	Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: avr32 build failures in linux-next

On Thursday 10 March 2016 01:20 AM, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:02 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>>> On 02/08/2016 08:06 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Not very surprising either.  The number of people using Linux on avr32
>>>>> is probably approximately zero, and if anyone is, they're likely still
>>>>> running 2.6.32 or thereabouts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once I tried up the topic about removal avr32 for good, but looks like
>>>> it wasn't a good time. Maybe now is better? It would really reduce a
>>>> burden on many drivers.
>>>>
>>> I would agree, as long as the maintainers agree. We don't want to repeat
>>> the h8300 experience.
>>
>> So, are we going to agree that avr32 must be retired from next cycle?
>>
>> P.S. I have no idea how to fix this "…relocation truncated to fit:
>> R_AVR32_21S…", though I can test anything anyone propose.
>
> I'd like to try fixing it before we delete anything.  At the very least,
> it's always a good idea to figure out exactly why it broke, just to be
> sure it isn't a broader issue that has yet to manifest itself elsewhere.
>

I will suggest keeping it for one more cycle and see if it can be fixed.

regards
sudip