Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:26:20 -0700 | From | Mike Travis <> | Subject | Re: [git pull] core/percpu for v2.6.27 |
| |
Ingo Molnar wrote:
... > > in hindsight core/percpu indeed looks unfinished and direction-less > without core/percpu-zerobased - but the latter is not stable yet. > > Ingo
Well it's very stable using gcc-4.2.4. The earlier problems came about using gcc-4.2.0 and has yet to be determined what exactly went wrong. (And I need to install gcc-3.2 to complete the build/test QA.)
Btw, is there a list of "bad" gcc's for kernel building? Or better yet, can the Makefile script provide a warning when a known "bad" gcc is being used to compile the kernel? I seem to recall that Peter provided this list:
4.2.3 is fine; he was using 4.2.0 before, and as far as I know, 4.2.0 and 4.2.1 are known broken for the kernel.
Thanks! Mike
| |