From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:40:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20080729114029.GA3836@elte.hu> References: <20080729180317.94c64634.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080729085815.GA1301@elte.hu> <20080729202731.F18F.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:48208 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755385AbYG2Lky (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:40:54 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080729202731.F18F.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Stephen Rothwell , David Miller , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Andrew Morton , Linus , Mike Travis * KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > Hi Ingo, > > > > > > On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:00:55 +0200 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > > -#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) ({ *get_cpu_mask(cpu); }) > > > > > +#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) (*get_cpu_mask(cpu)) > > > > > > > > hm, i'm wondering - is this a compiler bug? > > > > > > Or maybe a deficiency in such an old compiler (v3.4.5) but the fix > > > makes sense anyway, right? > > > > yeah, i was just wondering. > > in linux/README > > COMPILING the kernel: > > - Make sure you have at least gcc 3.2 available. > For more information, refer to Documentation/Changes. > > So, if 3.4.5 is old, Should we change readme? the fix is simple enough. but the question is, wont it generate huge artificial stackframes with CONFIG_MAXSMP and NR_CPUS=4096? Maybe it is unable to figure out and simplify the arithmetics there - or something like that. Ingo