From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gregory Farnum Subject: Re: building Ceph on various architectures Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 19:42:24 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1298720478.16174.14.camel@julia.gcs.org.hu> <1298749221.16174.29.camel@julia.gcs.org.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:42001 "EHLO mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752329Ab1B1Dmb (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Feb 2011 22:42:31 -0500 Received: by gxk8 with SMTP id 8so1372939gxk.19 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 19:42:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Laszlo Boszormenyi On Saturday, February 26, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote: On Saturday, February 26, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 10:28 -0800, Gregory Farnum wrote: > > > This looks like an error that came up (and got fixed) on Ubuntu several months ago: > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ceph/+bug/635388 > > Yes, it looks similar. But please note two things. The counterpart of > > #635388 in Ubuntu is #597193 [1] in Debian. It was fixed on the 20th of > > September, last year. Also, that bugs was: > > 'AO_fetch_and_sub1_write' was not declared in this scope > > Compared to this one: > > 'AO_fetch_and_add_write' was not declared in this scope > > > > I don't say it completely different, but doesn't look the exact same. > > Ah, I didn't notice that -- I'll look into it more closely! > I looked at this a bit more and there's nothing really obvious jumping out at me, but I do have a few observations/questions: 1) It looks to me like this is the same error of definitions as previously. AO_fetch_and_sub1_write, AO_fetch_and_add_write, etc are in both bugs. (This is to be expected, since the most probable cause of atomic-ops issues are problems with definition chaining.) 2) I notice that this is in the compile output: "Kernel: Linux 2.6.31-rc9 armel (armv5tel)" Does that mean it's building on an arm v5 machine? I wonder if maybe there's an issue there -- my knowledge of the ARM architecture is extremely limited (basically just tracking issues like this down) but from what I've read there were some changes which could account for a bug like this. Notably, atomic-ops for arm depends on the "__arm__" preprocessor variable being defined, which I'd expect to be defined for any version but maybe isn't. So, does anybody out there have more experience with ARM or the atomic-ops package? I can email the atomic-ops people but I'd like to make sure we aren't doing something odd ourselves! -Greg