Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Sep 2005 20:59:09 +0200 | From | Sam Ravnborg <> | Subject | Re: new asm-offsets.h patch problems |
| |
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 09:00:06AM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > So I still don't understand what is really happening here. > > I left my build script running overnight ... working on a > kernel at the 357d596bd... commit (where Linus merged in > my tree last night). This one has your "archprepare" patch > already included. > > Sometimes a build for a config succeeds, and sometimes it > fails. (tiger_defconfig for the last six builds has had a > GOOD, BAD, BAD, BAD, GOOD, GOOD sequence, while bigsur_defconfig > went GOOD, BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD). This non-determinism > doesn't fit in well with your explanation of missing defines > for PAGE_SIZE etc.
I have tried to reproduce it locally, but my gcc barfed out in namei.c with an internal error :-( I can explain why you see recompiles though.
asm-offsets.c has a dependency on asm-offsets.h So in the cases where asm-offsets.c is build just before asm-offsets.h then no recompile happens - at least not if they get same timestamp. But in the cases where there is a command or two in betweem the two the timestamps differ so next time you execute 'make' it will see that asm-offsets.h is newe than asm-offsets.c and thus it will rebuild the asm-offsets.h file.
But again this does not expalin why it sometimes goes bad, sometimes goes well. I need some compile output for good and bad cases to dig more into it. There is no chance this is unrealted to the asm-offsets changes?
Sam
> > -Tony > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |