Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

Ingo Molnar
2016-03-01T07:07:50Z

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> DESCEND objtool
> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/builtin-check.o
> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/special.o
> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/elf.o
> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/objtool.o
> MKDIR /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/arch/x86/insn/
> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/libstring.o
> elf.c:22:23: fatal error: sys/types.h: No such file or directory
> compilation terminated.
> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/exec-cmd.o
> CC /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/help.o
> builtin-check.c:28:20: fatal error: string.h: No such file or directory
> compilation terminated.
> objtool.c:28:19: fatal error: stdio.h: No such file or directory
> compilation terminated.
>
> and further errors ...
>
> This build is done with a PowerPC hosted cross compiler with no glibc.

Ugh, what a rare and weird way to build an x86 kernel, and you made linux-next
dependent on it?

> I assume that some things here need to be built with HOSTCC?

I suspect that's the culprit. Do you now mandate people to have PowerPC systems as
a requirement to merge to linux-next? How are people supposed to be able to test
that rare type of build method which does not matter to 99.99% of our kernel
testers and users?

Thanks,

Ingo