lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: linux-next: build failure

    * KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

    > >
    > > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Hi Ingo,
    > > >
    > > > On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:00:55 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > -#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) ({ *get_cpu_mask(cpu); })
    > > > > > +#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) (*get_cpu_mask(cpu))
    > > > >
    > > > > hm, i'm wondering - is this a compiler bug?
    > > >
    > > > Or maybe a deficiency in such an old compiler (v3.4.5) but the fix
    > > > makes sense anyway, right?
    > >
    > > yeah, i was just wondering.
    >
    > in linux/README
    >
    > COMPILING the kernel:
    >
    > - Make sure you have at least gcc 3.2 available.
    > For more information, refer to Documentation/Changes.
    >
    > So, if 3.4.5 is old, Should we change readme?

    the fix is simple enough.

    but the question is, wont it generate huge artificial stackframes with
    CONFIG_MAXSMP and NR_CPUS=4096? Maybe it is unable to figure out and
    simplify the arithmetics there - or something like that.

    Ingo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-29 13:43    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans