On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:39 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On February 29, 2016 11:28:22 PM PST, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 >>allmodconfig) >>>> failed like this: >>>> >>>> DESCEND objtool >>>> CC >>/home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/builtin-check.o >>>> CC >>/home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/special.o >>>> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/elf.o >>>> CC >>/home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/objtool.o >>>> MKDIR >>/home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/arch/x86/insn/ >>>> CC >>/home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/libstring.o >>>> elf.c:22:23: fatal error: sys/types.h: No such file or directory >>>> compilation terminated. >>>> CC >>/home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/exec-cmd.o >>>> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/help.o >>>> builtin-check.c:28:20: fatal error: string.h: No such file or >>directory >>>> compilation terminated. >>>> objtool.c:28:19: fatal error: stdio.h: No such file or directory >>>> compilation terminated. >>>> >>>> and further errors ... >>>> >>>> This build is done with a PowerPC hosted cross compiler with no >>glibc. >>> >>> Ugh, what a rare and weird way to build an x86 kernel, and you made >>linux-next >>> dependent on it? >>> >>>> I assume that some things here need to be built with HOSTCC? >>> >>> I suspect that's the culprit. Do you now mandate people to have >>PowerPC systems as >>> a requirement to merge to linux-next? How are people supposed to be >>able to test >>> that rare type of build method which does not matter to 99.99% of our >>kernel >>> testers and users? >>> >> > >From my experience in using different $COMPILER you should always pass >>CC and HOSTCC in your make-line when building a Linux-kernel or >>playing with the Kconfig-system. >> >>When building my llvm-toolchain with make/autoconf I had also to pass >>CC and CXX to my configure-line otherwise you got misconfiguration. >> >>[ EXAMPLE: Linux Kconfig-system ] >> >>$ MAKE="make V=1" ; COMPILER="mycompiler" ; MAKE_OPTS="CC=$COMPILER >>HOSTCC=$COMPILER" >> >>$ yes "" | $MAKE $MAKE_OPTS oldconfig && $MAKE $MAKE_OPTS >>silentoldconfig < /dev/null >> >>- Sedat - > > That is not the issue here. The problem is clearly that objtool is a host program and not compiled with host cc. So it is a good thing to test even though it is weird, because it affects real use cases. > > As x86 is far and beyond the most widely used host architecture, cross-compiling x86 is more likely to involve compiler differences than actually using another host, or possibly compiling 32 bits on a system without the 32-bit libc installed, but it should still work. > Thanks for the clarification. I talked about my experiences in software building in general. When this is a "tools/objtool problem" then someone should address this to "tools/objtool maintainers/folks" or whoever else is responsible. - Sedat - -- 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
