From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761194AbZCTTeS (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:34:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759128AbZCTTeB (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:34:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:37813 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752851AbZCTTeA (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:34:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:33:34 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Sam Ravnborg , LKML , Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: work around distcc/icecc madness Message-ID: <20090320193334.GA19501@elte.hu> References: <20090320092234.GA3792@elte.hu> <20090320185917.GB6224@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > --- > > > > > scripts/Kbuild.include | 5 +++-- > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > Doesnt fully work: > > > > > > > > arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S:346: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_signal_frame' > > > > arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S:394: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_signal_frame' > > > > arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S:519: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_signal_frame' > > > > arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S:614: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_signal_frame' > > > > arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S:685: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_signal_frame' > > > > arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S:754: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_signal_frame' > > > > > > > > config attached. Distcc driven build. > > > > > > Same config works fine here. Do you have different > > > compilers/binutils on your distcc cluster ? I tripped over this > > > distcc feature in the past, that's why I have switched to iceccc. > > > > the distcc binutils is different from the host build environment > > binutils and compiler. This always worked fine - can we preserve > > it? > > It depends what you define as "worked fine". as in "did not fail the build" :-) > The point is that the CFI checks are done at compile time by > checking binutils. If you have two versions - one with and one > without CFI support - then it's just a question of luck which one > is checked. So in your case it might have worked because both > distcc and your local gcc agreed that CFI is not enabled, but the > reason why the distcc check for CFI fails is because it fails to > handle the stdin input and not because it does not support CFI. > > So with my patch distcc gives you the correct answer, but now you > trip over the local binutils lack of CFI support. > > I don't think that such a setup is something we need to preserve. i dont do anything weird. i use: CROSS_COMPILE='distcc /opt/crosstool/gcc-4.2.2-glibc-2.3.6/i686-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/i686-unknown-linux-gnu-' host compiler was never supposed to be the same in terms of capability as target compiler. Ingo