From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat•com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel•org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital•net>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat•com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead•org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix•de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel•org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor•com>,
"linux-next@vger•kernel.org" <linux-next@vger•kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the luto-misc tree
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:44:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160722194416.pxbsnyhaqcyoigsj@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160722193655.GJ18962@kernel.org>
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 04:36:55PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 02:19:20PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu:
> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:37:39AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Em Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:41:18PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 09:23:02AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > It just looks like objtool was not written with cross compilation in
> > > > > mind?
> > >
> > > > I don't know yet what the specific problem is, but objtool should work
> > > > fine in a cross-compiled environment. It needs to be compiled with the
> > > > host (powerpc) compiler, but then it needs to disassemble target (x86)
> > > > files. It worked fine before the bitsperlong.h files were merged.
> > >
> > > So, trying to summarize from the various messages in this thread:
> > >
> > > In Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 01:26:08PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > > It produces these errors (from the x86_64 allmodconfig build):
> > > >
> > > > In file included from
> > > > /home/sfr/next/next/tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bitsperlong.h:10:0,
> > > > from /usr/include/asm-generic/int-ll64.h:11,
> > > > from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/types.h:27,
> > > > from /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/linux/types.h:9,
> > > > from /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/linux/list.h:4,
> > > > from elf.h:23,
> > > > from elf.c:30:
> > > > /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h:13:2:
> > > > error: #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
> > > > #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
> > > > ^
> > >
> > > So it starts at tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bitsperlong.h, and as
> > > you mention, this should've instead be using the host headers, i.e.:
> > >
> > > tools/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/bitsperlong.h
> > >
> > > Which it will if it uses HOSTARCH in tools/objtool/Makefile when setting
> > > up the header search path, I have two csets in my perf/core branch that
> > > fixes this, and that are equivalent to the last patch Stephen tried:
> > >
> > > $ git log --oneline -2
> > > 87f7dc54366a objtool: Use tools/scripts/Makefile.arch to get ARCH and HOSTARCH
> > > 0eec6770ab60 tools build: Add HOSTARCH Makefile variable
> > > $
> > >
> > > Ok, so now it uses the right file, see the whole sequence at the end of this
> > > e-mail, but it boils down to:
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > #if defined(__powerpc64__)
> > > # define __BITS_PER_LONG 64
> > > #else
> > > # define __BITS_PER_LONG 32
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > #ifdef __SIZEOF_LONG__
> > > #define BITS_PER_LONG (__CHAR_BIT__ * __SIZEOF_LONG__)
> > > #else
> > > #define BITS_PER_LONG __WORDSIZE
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > #if BITS_PER_LONG != __BITS_PER_LONG
> > > #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
> > > #endif
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Which I think has no problems, right? The last problem reported ty Stephen now is:
> > >
> > > In Fri, 22 Jul 2016 09:23:02 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > > That gets me this errors from the x86_64 allmodconfig build:
> > >
> > > > tools/objtool/objtool-in.o: In function `decode_instructions':
> > > > tools/objtool/builtin-check.c:276: undefined reference to `arch_decode_instruction'
> > >
> > > Should work, since ARCH should be x86 and then tools/objtool/Build will have
> > > this:
> > >
> > > objtool-y += arch/$(ARCH)/
> > >
> > > Turned into:
> > >
> > > objtool-y += arch/x86/
> > >
> > > Which will build tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c, that will provide that
> > > arch_decode_instruction() function :-\
> > >
> > > I.e. with the two patches I mentioned, that are equivalent to the last patch I
> > > sent to Stephen for testing, we would end up with HOSTARCH=powerpc and
> > > ARCH=x86, no?
> >
> > Thanks for spelling it out, that helped a lot.
>
> Glad you liked it, I had to do it for my own sanity :-)
>
> And something that gave me mixed feelings was an e-mail from the kbuild
> test bot that noticed my perf/core changes and said that the build was
> broken for "make ARCH=x86_64", so I had to reinstate this part:
>
> ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64)
> ARCH := x86
> endif
>
> Because, as you say, 'make ARCH=x86' works :-\ I think it will not be
> needed with your patch, right? I'm checking your patch below right now,
Yeah, that shouldn't be needed with my patch. I think either would
work, but my patch is more of a permanent solution.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-22 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-15 7:06 linux-next: build failure after merge of the luto-misc tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-15 7:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-15 7:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-15 15:09 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-15 15:24 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-15 15:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-15 15:56 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-15 15:43 ` [PATCH/RFC] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-15 15:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-15 16:28 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-15 20:26 ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-07-18 5:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-18 20:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-07-18 20:36 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-18 22:22 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-18 23:41 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-19 0:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-19 0:39 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-19 3:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-19 12:54 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-19 17:45 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-19 23:21 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-19 23:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-20 2:52 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-20 2:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-07-20 3:09 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-20 3:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-20 23:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-21 13:12 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-21 23:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-22 3:41 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2016-07-22 14:37 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-22 19:19 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2016-07-22 19:36 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-22 19:44 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2016-07-22 19:57 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-07-23 5:08 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-24 18:40 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-07-25 12:56 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160722194416.pxbsnyhaqcyoigsj@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=acme@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=acme@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=hpa@zytor$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital$(echo .)net \
--cc=mingo@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=peterz@infradead$(echo .)org \
--cc=sfr@canb$(echo .)auug.org.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix$(echo .)de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox