From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261717AbULGAc7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:32:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261718AbULGAc7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:32:59 -0500 Received: from smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.33]:62894 "HELO smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261717AbULGAcz (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:32:55 -0500 From: Blaisorblade To: Jon Masters Subject: Re: [PATCH] UML - SYSEMU fixes Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 01:36:42 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 Cc: Jeff Dike , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bodo Stroesser References: <200412032145.iB3LjQZW004710@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> <200412062017.29011.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> <41B4F1CB.8010908@jonmasters.org> In-Reply-To: <41B4F1CB.8010908@jonmasters.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412070136.43262.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 07 December 2004 00:56, Jon Masters wrote: > Blaisorblade wrote: > | On Sunday 05 December 2004 14:30, Jon Masters wrote: > |>Jeff Dike wrote: > |>| jonmasters@gmail.com said: > |>|>That's great, but do any of these patches address various undefines in > |>|>arch/um/kernel/process.c:check_sysemu when built without skas? > |>| > |>| Apparently they did. I just checked with skas turned off and got a > |>| successful build. > | > | They don't - check_sysemu is used also in TT mode. > I wasn't building for me, but I've not applied these patches yet. > |>Good. I've got a working build on an Intel box but it's being more > |>stubburn building for ppc in 2.6.9 - I'll post an update when I've > |>actually looked at it. > | > | PPC port is not maintained at the moment - there are some rumors of > somebody > | reviving it, but nothing is certain. > I want it for unrelated reasons, but I don't want to say I'll do it > because I probably won't find some time to do it :-) > (I will look though - it would be nice to have UML building on ppc since > that's what I have with me most of the time) If you search on uml-devel and/or uml-user: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=user-mode-linux-user&r=1&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=user-mode-linux-devel&r=1&w=2 you'll find > |>|>Also, on 2.6.9, I get dud CFLAGS defined when CONFIG_PROF is set *and* > |>|>CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER is also set - gcc complains about use of "-gp" > |>|>and "-fomit-frame-pointer" but surely it should be building with frame > |>|>pointers anyway if I've asked it to do so? > | > | I saw that from someone else - I don't remember what was the problem, > but it > | seemed to be some strange kind of .config. Make sure that > CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO > | and CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER are both set (the second is the needed one, the > | first implies the second for UML). > | > | "make oldconfig ARCH=um" should fix such problems. > Nope. My config wasn't that strange either - but I'm perfectly able to > figure out why it's breaking though. I just wanted to mention it. Yes, that's always appreciated... however, the dependencies between options seem correct, i.e. you can enable the -pg flag (for Gprof, IIRC) only if you have enabled debugging info, which also disables -fomit-frame-pointer. > Jon. -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade