On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 12:14 -0400, Marc Bejarano wrote: > At 17:17 10/22/2008, James Bottomley wrote: > >On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 13:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> OK, it's here: > >> > >> buf = kmalloc(vpd_len, GFP_KERNEL); > >> > >> it's a gcc bug. > >> > >> Please see if you can find some way to make it go away - perhaps change > >> vpd_len's type to `int', things like that. > >> > >> Or use a different compiler version :( > > i'm not worried about compiling this. i already did a compilation > without it and i'll be fine without SES. i just selected it on the > off chance i'd find time to play with it. i was just doing my duty > of reporting this to save others the trouble. > > >Could it be an optimisation issue? The static oversize test relies on > >the compiler optimising away a leg that can never be reached if the size > >is under the max. If you do a make V=1 you'll see what optimisation > >flags the compiler is using ... if it's -O2 then yes, the compiler > >should be optimising stuff away and it's a clear compiler problem. If > >it's anything else, we might have a mis setting of the optimisation > >level in the kernel build. > > looks to me like -Os: I think we have a winner: -Os is rather less well implemented in older versions of gcc. Could you retry with -O2? You do this by setting the config option CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE to N (it defaults to Y). If we verify this to be the root cause, we might consider making the default for that option N if gcc version is < 4. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
