Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-10 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 09:03:50 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Jakub, > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Jakub Kicinski > wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll()

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-10 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 09:03:50 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Jakub, > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Jakub Kicinski > wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to > >> __ffsdi2(),

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-10 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Jakub, On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to >> __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture,

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-10 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Jakub, On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to >> __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture, leading to >> failures like: >> >>

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi Geert, [auto build test ERROR on linus/master] [also build test ERROR on v4.14-rc4] [cannot apply to next-20171009] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi Geert, [auto build test ERROR on linus/master] [also build test ERROR on v4.14-rc4] [cannot apply to next-20171009] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to > __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture, leading to > failures like: > > rcar-gen3-cpg.c:(.text+0x289): undefined reference to `__ffsdi2' > >

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to > __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture, leading to > failures like: > > rcar-gen3-cpg.c:(.text+0x289): undefined reference to `__ffsdi2' > >

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi Geert, [auto build test ERROR on linus/master] [also build test ERROR on v4.14-rc4] [cannot apply to next-20170929] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi Geert, [auto build test ERROR on linus/master] [also build test ERROR on v4.14-rc4] [cannot apply to next-20170929] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to > __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture, leading to > failures like: > > rcar-gen3-cpg.c:(.text+0x289): undefined reference to `__ffsdi2' > >

Re: [PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:40:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to > __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture, leading to > failures like: > > rcar-gen3-cpg.c:(.text+0x289): undefined reference to `__ffsdi2' > >

[PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture, leading to failures like: rcar-gen3-cpg.c:(.text+0x289): undefined reference to `__ffsdi2' To fix this, use __ffs64() instead, which is available on all architectures.

[PATCH] bitfield: Use __ffs64(x) to fix missing __ffsdi2()

2017-10-09 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On most architectures[*], gcc turns __builtin_ffsll() into a call to __ffsdi2(), which is not provided by any architecture, leading to failures like: rcar-gen3-cpg.c:(.text+0x289): undefined reference to `__ffsdi2' To fix this, use __ffs64() instead, which is available on all architectures.