On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 09:23:02AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Arnaldo, > > On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 10:12:48 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Em Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 09:29:50AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell escreveu: > > > Hi Arnaldo, > > > > > > On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 23:52:02 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > Humm, it seems that the compiler used is not the cross one, but the > > > > native, check if, say, __powerpc__ is defined. > > > > > > Yes, __powerpc__ is defined (unsuprisingly). > > > > Maybe this one? > > > > diff --git a/tools/objtool/Makefile b/tools/objtool/Makefile > > index 1f75b0a046cc..3500fcf7bd47 100644 > > --- a/tools/objtool/Makefile > > +++ b/tools/objtool/Makefile > > @@ -1,10 +1,14 @@ > > include ../scripts/Makefile.include > > > > +HOSTARCH=$(shell uname -m | sed -e s/i.86/x86/ -e s/x86_64/x86/ \ > > + -e s/sun4u/sparc64/ \ > > + -e s/arm.*/arm/ -e s/sa110/arm/ \ > > + -e s/s390x/s390/ -e s/parisc64/parisc/ \ > > + -e s/ppc.*/powerpc/ -e s/mips.*/mips/ \ > > + -e s/sh[234].*/sh/ -e s/aarch64.*/arm64/ ) > > + > > ifndef ($(ARCH)) > > -ARCH ?= $(shell uname -m) > > -ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64) > > -ARCH := x86 > > -endif > > +ARCH ?= $(HOSTARCH) > > endif > > > > # always use the host compiler > > @@ -26,7 +30,7 @@ OBJTOOL_IN := $(OBJTOOL)-in.o > > > > all: $(OBJTOOL) > > > > -INCLUDES := -I$(srctree)/tools/include -I$(srctree)/tools/arch/$(ARCH)/include/uapi > > +INCLUDES := -I$(srctree)/tools/include -I$(srctree)/tools/arch/$(HOSTARCH)/include/uapi > > CFLAGS += -Wall -Werror $(EXTRA_WARNINGS) -fomit-frame-pointer -O2 -g $(INCLUDES) > > LDFLAGS += -lelf $(LIBSUBCMD) > > > > 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' > > 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. I can try to take a deeper look at it tomorrow. > It seems to build and run OK when you remove the test that > checks that BITS_PER_LONG and __BITS_PER_LONG are the same, but I have > no idea if it getting the desired results. -- Josh -- 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
