lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: stable build: 203 builds: 4 failed, 199 passed, 5 errors, 41 warnings (v4.10.1)
Em Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:17:04PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:03:38PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:39:36PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 02:44:45PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > >> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >> It's probably another variation of this bug, but the commit you cite got merged
> > > >> into 4.10-rc1, while the problem still persists in mainline (4.11-rc2+).

> > > > the problem is in objtool build right? the fix was for perf build

> > > Ah, got it. Yes, that must be it then. I supposed we coul duplicate what you
> > > did for perf in objtool, but a cleaner way would be to generalize it for all of
> > > tools/, right?

> right, the thing is that objtool is standalone application like perf,
> and before their builds can go the 'fixdep' needs to be there.. that's
> a condition to use the tools/build framework

> not sure how offensive it'd be to current Makefiles if we come with some
> generalized code to do that.. I'll think about it, but I think we might
> be better of the way we are now

> > Humm, can't we have just one fixdep?

> we have.. it's just the matter who will build it first ;-)

Ok, I haven't said "can't we have just one fixdep?", what I really said
was "can't we make sure we don't have races building it?" ;-)

- Arnaldo

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-03-16 16:46    [W:0.046 / U:0.244 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site