lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Build regressions/improvements in v4.4-rc8
From
Date
On 01/04/2016 07:04 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>> JFYI, when comparing v4.4-rc8[1] to v4.4-rc7[3], the summaries are:
>> - build errors: +19/-18
>
> + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/kernel/ftrace.c: error: implicit
> declaration of function 'flush_tlb_all'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]: => 93:2
> + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/kernel/patch.c: error:
> 'L_PTE_DIRTY' undeclared (first use in this function): => 39:2
> + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/kernel/patch.c: error:
> 'L_PTE_MT_WRITEBACK' undeclared (first use in this function): => 39:2
> + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/kernel/patch.c: error:
> 'L_PTE_PRESENT' undeclared (first use in this function): => 39:2
> + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/kernel/patch.c: error: 'L_PTE_XN'
> undeclared (first use in this function): => 39:2
> + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/kernel/patch.c: error:
> 'L_PTE_YOUNG' undeclared (first use in this function): => 39:2
>
> arm-randconfig
> Seen and report before
>
> + /tmp/cc5DX198.s: Error: can't resolve `_start' {*UND* section} -
> `L0^A' {.text section}: => 43
> + /tmp/ccHnSrdb.s: Error: can't resolve `_start' {*UND* section} -
> `L0^A' {.text section}: => 49, 366
> + /tmp/ccSLqWGf.s: Error: can't resolve `_start' {*UND* section} -
> `L0^A' {.text section}: => 43
> + /tmp/cch44bTJ.s: Error: can't resolve `_start' {*UND* section} -
> `L0^A' {.text section}: => 378, 49
> + /tmp/ccjj7cLa.s: Error: can't resolve `_start' {*UND* section} -
> `L0^A' {.text section}: => 43
> + /tmp/ccsgtMo8.s: Error: can't resolve `_start' {*UND* section} -
> `L0^A' {.text section}: => 41, 403
> + /tmp/ccxItlIa.s: Error: can't resolve `_start' {*UND* section} -
> `L0^A' {.text section}: => 43
>
> Various mips.
> Seems like the fix for this fix still doesn't fix everything?
>

Yes, there are more binutils problems. The current kernel code does not correctly
detect binutils versions such as 2.24.90, where the third level version number
is >= 10. See the discussion in [1], and the fix from James Hogan in [2].


If I find the time, I'll extend my test scripts to run some mips builds
with different binutils versions.

Guenter

---
[1] https://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/11929/
[2] https://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/11931/



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-01-04 16:41    [W:0.083 / U:0.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site