lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Sep]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] powerpc/boot: Fix build failure since GCC 4.9 removal
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:17:23PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Stephen reported that the build was broken since commit
> 6d2ef226f2f1 ("compiler_attributes.h: drop __has_attribute() support for
> gcc4"), with errors such as:
>
> include/linux/compiler_attributes.h:296:5: warning: "__has_attribute" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
> 296 | #if __has_attribute(__warning__)
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> make[2]: *** [arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile:225: arch/powerpc/boot/crt0.o] Error 1
>
> But we expect __has_attribute() to always be defined now that we've
> stopped using GCC 4.
>
> Linus debugged it to the point of reading the GCC sources, and noticing
> that the problem is that __has_attribute() is not defined when
> preprocessing assembly files, which is what we're doing here.
>
> Our assembly files don't include, or need, compiler_attributes.h, but
> they are getting it unconditionally from the -include in BOOT_CFLAGS,
> which is then added in its entirety to BOOT_AFLAGS.
>
> That -include was added in commit 77433830ed16 ("powerpc: boot: include
> compiler_attributes.h") so that we'd have "fallthrough" and other
> attributes defined for the C files in arch/powerpc/boot. But it's not
> needed for assembly files.
>
> The minimal fix is to move the addition to BOOT_CFLAGS of -include
> compiler_attributes.h until after we've copied BOOT_CFLAGS into
> BOOT_AFLAGS. That avoids including compiler_attributes.h for asm files,
> but makes no other change to BOOT_CFLAGS or BOOT_AFLAGS.
>
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Debugged-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

> ---
> arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>
> This seemed safer as a minimal fix, rather than doing a more
> comprehensive separation of CFLAGS/AFLAGS. We can do that in a future
> patch.
>
> It passed my usual build/boot tests, including booting the built zImage
> on some real hardware, so this is good to go from my POV.
>
> cheers
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
> index 6900d0ac2421..089ee3ea55c8 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
> @@ -35,7 +35,6 @@ endif
> BOOTCFLAGS := -Wall -Wundef -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs \
> -fno-strict-aliasing -O2 -msoft-float -mno-altivec -mno-vsx \
> -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-builtin -fPIC -nostdinc \
> - -include $(srctree)/include/linux/compiler_attributes.h \
> $(LINUXINCLUDE)
>
> ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_BOOT_WRAPPER
> @@ -70,6 +69,7 @@ ifeq ($(call cc-option-yn, -fstack-protector),y)
> BOOTCFLAGS += -fno-stack-protector
> endif
>
> +BOOTCFLAGS += -include $(srctree)/include/linux/compiler_attributes.h
> BOOTCFLAGS += -I$(objtree)/$(obj) -I$(srctree)/$(obj)
>
> DTC_FLAGS ?= -p 1024
> --
> 2.25.1
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-09-14 16:47    [W:0.048 / U:23.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site