Re: linux-next build error (9)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 11:32, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:44:13PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:49:23 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > Hurmph, I though that was cured in GCC >= 8. Marco?
> >
> > So what causes this? Because we got a couple of these in our s390 builds last night as well.
>
> This is KASAN's __no_sanitize_address function attribute. Some GCC
> versions are utterly wrecked when that function attribute is combined
> with inlining. It wants to have matching attributes for the function
> being inlined and function it is inlined into -- hence the function
> attribute mismatch.
>
> > kernel/locking/lockdep.c:805:1: error: inlining failed in call to always_inline 'look_up_lock_class': function attribute mismatch
> > include/linux/debug_locks.h:15:28: error: inlining failed in call to always_inline '__debug_locks_off': function attribute mismatch
> >
> > s390-linux-gcc (GCC) 8.1.0 / GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.30
>
> *groan*... So supposedly it was supposed to work on GCC-8 and later, see
> commit 7b861a53e46b6. But now it turns out there's some later versions
> that fail too.
>
> I suppose the next quest is finding a s390 compiler version that works
> and then bumping the version test in the aforementioned commit.

 I'm trying to figure out by inspecting GCC changelogs which version
and which arch is actually good.

Thanks,
-- Marco



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux