From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: Exynos build failure in -next allmodconfig Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 14:01:02 +0200 Message-ID: <5418267E.8070501@gmail.com> References: <20140915163458.GS7960@sirena.org.uk> <20140915175709.GE12361@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <541822AC.8040805@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-we0-f169.google.com ([74.125.82.169]:46664 "EHLO mail-we0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753173AbaIPMBM (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 08:01:12 -0400 Received: by mail-we0-f169.google.com with SMTP id w61so5630636wes.0 for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 05:01:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <541822AC.8040805@samsung.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?S3J6eXN6dG9mIEtvesWCb3dza2k=?= , Russell King - ARM Linux , Mark Brown Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz On 16.09.2014 13:44, Krzysztof Koz=C5=82owski wrote: > On 15.09.2014 19:57, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 09:34:58AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:57:09AM +0100, Build bot for Mark Brown >>> wrote: >>> >>> Today's -next got a build failure in ARM allmodconfig due to platsm= p.c: >>> >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: warning: incorrect type in >>> return expression (different address spaces) >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: expected void [noderef] >>> * >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: got void * >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: warning: incorrect type in >>> return expression (different address spaces) >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: expected void [noderef] >>> * >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: got void * >>> | CC arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.o >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s: Assembler messages: >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s:423: Error: selected processor does not support A= RM >>> mode `isb ' >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s:428: Error: selected processor does not support A= RM >>> mode `isb ' >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s:429: Error: selected processor does not support A= RM >>> mode `dsb ' >>> | scripts/Makefile.build:257: recipe for target >>> 'arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.o' failed >>> >>> Looks like we need a compiler flags override for that file. >> >> Or.. the question is why a .c file is not using the proper macros. >=20 > Actually I am the one to blame for build failure (commit: "ARM: EXYNO= S: > Move code from hotplug.c to platsmp.c"). The problem is > v7_exit_coherency_flush() which I think does not make sense on ARMv6. >=20 > I'll replace the ISB and DSB commands with macros but the real questi= on > is whether the mach-exynos/platsmp.c file and mach-exynos directory > should be compiled when CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS is not defined? I think the problematic case here is v6+v7 multiplatform, where even though CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS is defined, compiler flags for lowest common denominator (v6) must be used. Using appropriate macros should fix the problem indeed. Best regards, Tomasz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tomasz.figa@gmail.com (Tomasz Figa) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 14:01:02 +0200 Subject: Exynos build failure in -next allmodconfig In-Reply-To: <541822AC.8040805@samsung.com> References: <20140915163458.GS7960@sirena.org.uk> <20140915175709.GE12361@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <541822AC.8040805@samsung.com> Message-ID: <5418267E.8070501@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 16.09.2014 13:44, Krzysztof Koz?owski wrote: > On 15.09.2014 19:57, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 09:34:58AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:57:09AM +0100, Build bot for Mark Brown >>> wrote: >>> >>> Today's -next got a build failure in ARM allmodconfig due to platsmp.c: >>> >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: warning: incorrect type in >>> return expression (different address spaces) >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: expected void [noderef] >>> * >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: got void * >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: warning: incorrect type in >>> return expression (different address spaces) >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: expected void [noderef] >>> * >>> | arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c:198:31: got void * >>> | CC arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.o >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s: Assembler messages: >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s:423: Error: selected processor does not support ARM >>> mode `isb ' >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s:428: Error: selected processor does not support ARM >>> mode `isb ' >>> | /tmp/ccC9fkwF.s:429: Error: selected processor does not support ARM >>> mode `dsb ' >>> | scripts/Makefile.build:257: recipe for target >>> 'arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.o' failed >>> >>> Looks like we need a compiler flags override for that file. >> >> Or.. the question is why a .c file is not using the proper macros. > > Actually I am the one to blame for build failure (commit: "ARM: EXYNOS: > Move code from hotplug.c to platsmp.c"). The problem is > v7_exit_coherency_flush() which I think does not make sense on ARMv6. > > I'll replace the ISB and DSB commands with macros but the real question > is whether the mach-exynos/platsmp.c file and mach-exynos directory > should be compiled when CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS is not defined? I think the problematic case here is v6+v7 multiplatform, where even though CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS is defined, compiler flags for lowest common denominator (v6) must be used. Using appropriate macros should fix the problem indeed. Best regards, Tomasz