From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 04:22:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:52248 "EHLO linux-mips.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S23990519AbcLODWniYSNk (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 04:22:43 +0100 Received: from h7.dl5rb.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by h7.dl5rb.org.uk (8.15.2/8.14.8) with ESMTP id uBF3Mg7e028683; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 04:22:42 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by h7.dl5rb.org.uk (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id uBF3MfaO028682; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 04:22:41 +0100 Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 04:22:41 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Mark Brown Cc: kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: next build: 198 builds: 4 failed, 194 passed, 7 errors, 82 warnings (next-20161214) Message-ID: <20161215032241.GB15191@linux-mips.org> References: <58510536.04c7190a.4a2fb.ae5c@mx.google.com> <20161214135214.osrlldhxvxzfwial@sirena.org.uk> <20161214160609.GA15191@linux-mips.org> <20161214174539.h3xsugswlq576g7b@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161214174539.h3xsugswlq576g7b@sirena.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 56053 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 05:45:39PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 17:45:39 +0000 > From: Mark Brown > To: Ralf Baechle > Cc: kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org > Subject: Re: next build: 198 builds: 4 failed, 194 passed, 7 errors, 82 > warnings (next-20161214) > Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; > protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pme7352aoyqgs7t5" > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 05:06:09PM +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 01:52:14PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:39:18AM -0800, kernelci.org bot wrote: > > > > > mips: gcc version 5.3.0 (Sourcery CodeBench Lite 2016.05-8) > > > > These MIPS builds have been failing in kernelci ever since MIPS was > > > added. This means that we've got a constant level of noise in the > > > results which makes them less useful for everyone - people get used to > > > ignoring errors. Is there any plan to get these fixed? > > > I wonder if these are also toolchain-related issues. allnoconfig and > > tinyconfig do build fine for me with GCC 6.1.0 and binutils 2.26.20160125. > > > generic_defconfig requires mkimage of uboot-tools or it will fail like this: > > > ITB arch/mips/boot/vmlinux.gz.itb > > "mkimage" command not found - U-Boot images will not be built > > arch/mips/boot/Makefile:159: recipe for target 'arch/mips/boot/vmlinux.gz.itb' failed > > make[1]: *** [arch/mips/boot/vmlinux.gz.itb] Error 1 > > arch/mips/Makefile:365: recipe for target 'vmlinux.gz.itb' failed > > make: *** [vmlinux.gz.itb] Error 2 > > Ah, you don't have a separate uImage target? > > > What binutils are you using and can you send me the build errors messages? > > You can see logs for all the trees we build via the web interface: > > https://kernelci.org/job/ > > I don't have access to the builders to check the binutils version > without going and finding/downloading the CodeSourcery release. Where > did your toolchain come from, is there something specific recommended > for MIPS? I specifically avoid non-standard toolchains, that is I stick to the vanilla FSF releases with no feature patches. Some configurations, in particular new cores or architecture variants may require vendor tool- chains or patches until support makes it upstream. I wonder if for the benefit of automated build testing we should tag kernel configurations with a special CONFIG_ symbol to indicate they need non-standard tools? That would allow build testing to detect and possibly skip such configuration. Ralf