Re: linux-next: build failure

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

 



Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Dave,

Today's linux-next build (sparc64 defconfig) failed like this:

kernel/time/tick-common.c: In function `tick_check_new_device':
kernel/time/tick-common.c:210: error: invalid lvalue in unary `&'
kernel/time/tick-common.c:223: error: invalid lvalue in unary `&'
kernel/time/tick-common.c:255: error: invalid lvalue in unary `&'

gcc is version 3.4.5 sparc64 cross compiler (powercp64 host).

The below patch fixes it.

when you take the address of the result.  Noticed on a sparc64 compile
using a version 3.4.5 cross compiler.

kernel/time/tick-common.c: In function `tick_check_new_device':
kernel/time/tick-common.c:210: error: invalid lvalue in unary `&'
kernel/time/tick-common.c:223: error: invalid lvalue in unary `&'
kernel/time/tick-common.c:255: error: invalid lvalue in unary `&'

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 include/linux/cpumask.h |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h
index 96d0509..d3219d7 100644
--- a/include/linux/cpumask.h
+++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h
@@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ static inline const cpumask_t *get_cpu_mask(unsigned int cpu)
  * gcc optimizes it out (it's a constant) and there's no huge stack
  * variable created:
  */
-#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) ({ *get_cpu_mask(cpu); })
+#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) (*get_cpu_mask(cpu))

hm, i'm wondering - is this a compiler bug?

	Ingo

Same problem on x86/gcc 3.4.6, but will pass on gcc 4.x

Regards,
Wenji
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux USB Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux