Em Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 02:44:17PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 04:36:55PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 02:19:20PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu: > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:37:39AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > > I.e. with the two patches I mentioned, that are equivalent to the last patch I > > > > sent to Stephen for testing, we would end up with HOSTARCH=powerpc and > > > > ARCH=x86, no? > > > Thanks for spelling it out, that helped a lot. > > Glad you liked it, I had to do it for my own sanity :-) > > And something that gave me mixed feelings was an e-mail from the kbuild > > test bot that noticed my perf/core changes and said that the build was > > broken for "make ARCH=x86_64", so I had to reinstate this part: > > ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64) > > ARCH := x86 > > endif > > Because, as you say, 'make ARCH=x86' works :-\ I think it will not be > > needed with your patch, right? I'm checking your patch below right now, > Yeah, that shouldn't be needed with my patch. I think either would > work, but my patch is more of a permanent solution. Sure, I left it there because then we don't have bisection broke at that fix I made, i.e. 'make ARCH=x86_64' works at that point too. I applied your patch and will push it to Ingo, now we must cross our fingers so that Stephen doesn't come back to us once more telling it is still broken :o) Best regards, - Arnaldo -- 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
