On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:51:00PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
> Ummm, interesting.
>
> But is it solved?
>
> Suppose developer a.n.other submits a patch that works with his/her GCC
> version but doesn't with some other GCC version. I guess this will be
> picked up in GIT build tests, but that
On 30/06/14 14:26, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:24:23PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Btw, I thought you had that gcc 4.2.x from some distro or so. Because
if it is in some ancient distro, one could install it in kvm and test
and play with it.
Ok, I did dig out an ancient
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:24:23PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Btw, I thought you had that gcc 4.2.x from some distro or so. Because
> if it is in some ancient distro, one could install it in kvm and test
> and play with it.
Ok, I did dig out an ancient debian I had lying around here with gcc
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:24:23PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Btw, I thought you had that gcc 4.2.x from some distro or so. Because
if it is in some ancient distro, one could install it in kvm and test
and play with it.
Ok, I did dig out an ancient debian I had lying around here with gcc
On 30/06/14 14:26, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:24:23PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Btw, I thought you had that gcc 4.2.x from some distro or so. Because
if it is in some ancient distro, one could install it in kvm and test
and play with it.
Ok, I did dig out an ancient
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:51:00PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Ummm, interesting.
But is it solved?
Suppose developer a.n.other submits a patch that works with his/her GCC
version but doesn't with some other GCC version. I guess this will be
picked up in GIT build tests, but that only then
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:05:29PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
> Thanks Boris, but unfortunately I had to trash GCC 4.2.4 to build the
> new 4.7.4 version - so I can't test the patch :(
>
> At least this issue is now on record so others will not need to go to
> penalties.
I hope so.
Btw, I thought
On 29/06/14 20:44, Borislav Petkov wrote:
This then is an old(er) version of GCC issue (but I dunno what).
Right, so the error points at
__spin_lock_mb_cache_entry(struct mb_cache_entry *ce)
{
spin_lock(bgl_lock_ptr(mb_cache_bg_lock, <---
(hash_64((unsigned long)ce,
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 08:06:36PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
> OK, I just spent three months building GCC 4.7.4 today (thank god the
> world cup is on to watch instead)
Yep, the world cup helps a lot with tedious debugging work. :-)
> and 3.15.2 built fine, and server is up and
> running great.
>
On 28/06/14 14:09, Nick Warne wrote:
On 28/06/14 13:23, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 11:55:07AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Whoops - that is WRONG (too many ssh terminals)
gcc version 4.2.4
That's some old compiler. Anyway, I can't trigger it here with gcc 4.6
and 4.9.
Can
On 28/06/14 14:09, Nick Warne wrote:
On 28/06/14 13:23, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 11:55:07AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Whoops - that is WRONG (too many ssh terminals)
gcc version 4.2.4
That's some old compiler. Anyway, I can't trigger it here with gcc 4.6
and 4.9.
Can
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 08:06:36PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
OK, I just spent three months building GCC 4.7.4 today (thank god the
world cup is on to watch instead)
Yep, the world cup helps a lot with tedious debugging work. :-)
and 3.15.2 built fine, and server is up and
running great.
On 29/06/14 20:44, Borislav Petkov wrote:
This then is an old(er) version of GCC issue (but I dunno what).
Right, so the error points at
__spin_lock_mb_cache_entry(struct mb_cache_entry *ce)
{
spin_lock(bgl_lock_ptr(mb_cache_bg_lock, ---
(hash_64((unsigned long)ce,
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:05:29PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Thanks Boris, but unfortunately I had to trash GCC 4.2.4 to build the
new 4.7.4 version - so I can't test the patch :(
At least this issue is now on record so others will not need to go to
penalties.
I hope so.
Btw, I thought you
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 11:55:07AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
> Whoops - that is WRONG (too many ssh terminals)
>
> gcc version 4.2.4
That's some old compiler. Anyway, I can't trigger it here with gcc 4.6
and 4.9.
Can you do
$ make clean
$ make V=1 fs/mbcache.i >>w.log 2>&1
$ make V=1
On 28/06/14 11:26, Nick Warne wrote:
On 28/06/14 11:12, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 10:52:24AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Hi Everybody,
Today I was trying to build 3.15.2 on AMD64 from kernel 3.14.8 and get this:
CC fs/mbcache.o
fs/mbcache.c: In function
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 10:52:24AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
> Hi Everybody,
>
> Today I was trying to build 3.15.2 on AMD64 from kernel 3.14.8 and get this:
>
> CC fs/mbcache.o
> fs/mbcache.c: In function ‘__spin_lock_mb_cache_entry’:
> fs/mbcache.c:134: error: SSE register return with
Hi Everybody,
Today I was trying to build 3.15.2 on AMD64 from kernel 3.14.8 and get this:
CC fs/mbcache.o
fs/mbcache.c: In function ‘__spin_lock_mb_cache_entry’:
fs/mbcache.c:134: error: SSE register return with SSE disabled
make[1]: *** [fs/mbcache.o] Error 1
google doesn't reveal
Hi Everybody,
Today I was trying to build 3.15.2 on AMD64 from kernel 3.14.8 and get this:
CC fs/mbcache.o
fs/mbcache.c: In function ‘__spin_lock_mb_cache_entry’:
fs/mbcache.c:134: error: SSE register return with SSE disabled
make[1]: *** [fs/mbcache.o] Error 1
google doesn't reveal
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 10:52:24AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Hi Everybody,
Today I was trying to build 3.15.2 on AMD64 from kernel 3.14.8 and get this:
CC fs/mbcache.o
fs/mbcache.c: In function ‘__spin_lock_mb_cache_entry’:
fs/mbcache.c:134: error: SSE register return with SSE
On 28/06/14 11:26, Nick Warne wrote:
On 28/06/14 11:12, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 10:52:24AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Hi Everybody,
Today I was trying to build 3.15.2 on AMD64 from kernel 3.14.8 and get this:
CC fs/mbcache.o
fs/mbcache.c: In function
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 11:55:07AM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Whoops - that is WRONG (too many ssh terminals)
gcc version 4.2.4
That's some old compiler. Anyway, I can't trigger it here with gcc 4.6
and 4.9.
Can you do
$ make clean
$ make V=1 fs/mbcache.i w.log 21
$ make V=1 fs/mbcache.s
22 matches
Mail list logo
