From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753040AbcGTCwJ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 19 Jul 2016 22:52:09 -0400
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:46798 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752933AbcGTCwH (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 19 Jul 2016 22:52:07 -0400
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 23:52:02 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the
 luto-misc tree
Message-ID: <20160720025202.GB18962@kernel.org>
References: <20160718203634.GF2207@kernel.org>
 <20160719082235.42aec856@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20160718234132.GI2207@kernel.org>
 <20160719102629.0a12a1a1@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20160719003906.GJ2207@kernel.org>
 <20160719132608.1aa2692a@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20160719125443.GL2207@kernel.org>
 <20160719174551.GM2207@kernel.org>
 <20160720092157.7cd8de65@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20160720095333.3034531c@canb.auug.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160720095333.3034531c@canb.auug.org.au>
X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Em Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:53:33AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell escreveu:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 09:21:57 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 14:45:51 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >  #if BITS_PER_LONG != __BITS_PER_LONG
> > > +#include <linux/stringify.h>
> > > +#pragma message "BITS_PER_LONG=" __stringify(BITS_PER_LONG)
> > > +#pragma message "__BITS_PER_LONG=" __stringify(__BITS_PER_LONG)
> > >  #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
> > >  #endif  

> > I added those three lines to the file (just in yesterday's linux-next
> > was easiest) and got this:

> > /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h:14:9: note: #pragma message: BITS_PER_LONG=(8 * 8)
> >  #pragma message "BITS_PER_LONG=" __stringify(BITS_PER_LONG)

> > /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h:15:9: note: #pragma message: __BITS_PER_LONG=32
> >  #pragma message "__BITS_PER_LONG=" __stringify(__BITS_PER_LONG)

> > (a few times, of course)
 
> So I applied this:
 
> +++ b/tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bitsperlong.h
> @@ -4,6 +4,12 @@
>  #if defined(__x86_64__) && !defined(__ILP32__)
>  # define __BITS_PER_LONG 64
>  #else
> +#ifndef __x86_64__
> +#pragma message "__x86_64__ is not defined"
> +#endif
> +#ifdef __ILP32__
> +#pragma message "__ILP32__ is defined"
> +#endif
>  # define __BITS_PER_LONG 32
>  #endif
 
> and got this:
 
> /home/sfr/next/next/tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bitsperlong.h:8:9: note: #pragma message: __x86_64__ is not defined
>  #pragma message "__x86_64__ is not defined"

Humm, it seems that the compiler used is not the cross one, but the
native, check if, say, __powerpc__ is defined.

- Arnaldo