On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 12:28:17AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 03:54:49PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 09:57:33PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > Hi Al, > > > > > > FYI, kernel build failed on > > > > > > tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/signal.git master > > > head: aad206fddcb7642e6777b1b992645299b7557ded > > > commit: 28ba6e34ce54cb7ce2e509369a6f9c47c13083d9 [62/63] m68k: switch to generic sys_execve()/kernel_execve() > > > config: m68k-m5475evb_defconfig (attached as .config) > > > > > > All related error/warning messages: > > > > > > arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S: Assembler messages: > > > arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S:115: Error: operands mismatch -- statement `moveml (%sp)+,%d0-%d2' ignored > > > arch/m68k/kernel/entry.S:117: Error: operands mismatch -- statement `moveml %d1-%d3,-(%sp)' ignored > > > > On which toolchain? It had been a valid instruction on all m68k, starting with > > 68000. Is that as(1) insisting on %sp@+ form instead of (%sp)+? But we have > > both kinds used in arch/m68k, so if some toolchain version barfs on that, it's > > probably rather unhappy elsewhere... > > Err, I'm running binaries from: > > https://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/4.6.3/x86_64-gcc-4.6.3-nolibc_m68k-linux.tar.xz Ho-hum... ; strings as |grep Binutils (GNU Binutils) 2.22 ; So it's 2.22... 2.20 definitely accepts both variants of syntax. OK, I'll look into that. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
