Am Mittwoch, 21 September 2016, 10:27:46 schrieb Michael Ellerman:
> Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au> writes:
> > On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 22:00:32 +1000 Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au> 
wrote:
> >> Ah yep looks like that's the problem, patch below should fix it?
> > 
> > Yeah, I am just going to (logically) run "sed
> > 's/CONFIG_WORD_SIZE/BITS/'"
> > over the tree during the merge of the apm-current tree today.
> > 
> >> I think I'd actually prefer it if purgatory didn't redefine the CFLAGS
> >> from scratch, so I'll see if Thiago can do that and send a new version.
> > 
> > That could be better, but there are still some additions of
> > CONFIG_WORD_SIZE elsewhere :-(
> 
> I don't see any others in yesterday's next?

This kbuild failure is one case:

https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2016-September/148898.html

elf_util_64.o is only built if CONFIG_WORD_SIZE=64. This is affects the 
bisectabilty of many patches in the kexec_file_load series. Should I post a 
new version rebased on powerpc/next?

-- 
[]'s
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center

Reply via email to