[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180919163102.1a0adefb@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 16:31:02 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the vfs tree
Hi David,
On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 07:01:00 +0100 David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> > > I think the problem is that I haven't allocated system call numbers for
> > > any arches other than x86 - even the x86 syscall numbers are provisional
> > > until the patchset is taken upstream. I'm not sure of the best way to
> > > deal with this - make the samples dependent on the X86 arch?
> >
> > But the sample programs are built with HOSTCC, so you can't depend on
> > ARCH (since I, for one, am cross compiling). Maybe SUBARCH. Better
> > would be to use either Kconfig's shell primitive or some make magic to
> > figure out if the syscall number define's are defined.
>
> I meant put the dependency in the Kconfig.
Yeah, sure. Kconfig now has the ability for that dependency to be the
result of an external program "$(shell ....)", so you could have a
script or program that checked to see if the syscall numbers are
defined and then have the Kconfig symbol(s) for the tests depend on that.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists