Re: [tip:x86/vdso] x86, vdso: Reimplement vdso.so preparation in build-time C

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

On 05/29/2014 12:32 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Paul Gortmaker
> <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 6:25 PM, tip-bot for Andy Lutomirski
>> <tipbot@zytor.com> wrote:
>>> Commit-ID:  6f121e548f83674ab4920a4e60afb58d4f61b829
>>> Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/6f121e548f83674ab4920a4e60afb58d4f61b829
>>> Author:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
>>> AuthorDate: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:19:34 -0700
>>> Committer:  H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
>>> CommitDate: Mon, 5 May 2014 13:18:51 -0700
>>>
>>> x86, vdso: Reimplement vdso.so preparation in build-time C
>>
>> Just a heads up in case it hasn't been mentioned already;
>> the x86 builds in linux-next which IIRC are done as cross
>> compile on a powerpc box are failing as follows:
>>
>>   VDSO2C  arch/x86/vdso/vdso-image-64.c
>> /bin/sh: line 1: 15995 Segmentation fault      arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c
>> arch/x86/vdso/vdso64.so.dbg arch/x86/vdso/vdso-image-64.c
>> make[3]: *** [arch/x86/vdso/vdso-image-64.c] Error 139
>>
>> http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/11265454/
>>
> 
> Egads.  This wouldn't be a big-endian host by any chance?
> 

He said PowerPC; most but not all PowerPC systems are bigendian.  Seems
like a fair assumption to make.

	-hpa