Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

Russell King
2005-03-04T12:26:19Z

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:44:10AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:26:32AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 08:38:12PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > Grump. Have all these regressions received the appropriate level of
> > > > > visibility on this mailing list?
> > > >
> > > > Looking at the http://l4x.org/k/ site, it appears that all -mm versions
> > > > have broken ARM support with the defconfig, while Linus kernels at least
> > > > build fine.
> > >
> > > It's very much in an arch maintainer's interest to make sure that
> > > cross-compilers are easily obtainable. Any hints?
> >
> > Been trying to achieve that since it's a FAQ on ARM lists. Even gone to
> > the extent of setting up a separate mailing list, getting a volunteer to
> > track what people want and do the hard work to build them. That was
> > about 6 months ago, and I haven't seen any results.
>
> hm. That's strange. I'd have thought that 99% of the arm embedded
> developers cross-build.

Yes - I think Dan Kegel's cross-tool gets used a fair bit...

> > Anyway, going back to why -mm doesn't work:
> >
> > arch/arm/kernel/built-in.o(.init.text+0xb64): In function `$a':
> > : undefined reference to `rd_size'
> > make[1]: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1

Actually, this highlights another problem - it's ARM binutils again.
Jan's cross-binutils for ARM doesn't contain the patches to make the
linker resolve addresses to the _correct_ symbol. Don't ask me
where they are, but I'm lead to believe that cross-tool knows.

This also means that Jan's compile test is rather worthless for ARM -
it might be linking a kernel with undefined symbols due to the other
assembler bug.

> Ah. Fixed, thanks.

Thanks.

--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core