From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758215Ab3AQBZZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:25:25 -0500 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:40138 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755928Ab3AQBZY (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:25:24 -0500 Message-ID: <50F75349.2050609@infradead.org> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:26:33 -0800 From: Randy Dunlap User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130105 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: werner CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: Linux 3.8-rc1: compiling problem in perf-event-p6.o References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/15/13 06:50, werner wrote: > We are now on -rc3 and someone should correct this, finally > > This is a regression, it was not before, on 3.6 > > This messes up any compilation of the whole kernel, it results in don't be produced vmlinuz > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p6.o depends on so much things that I don't get it switched off, I suppose it's necesary for the most systems > > > W.Landgraf > > > > > > > ================= > The problem continues with 3.8-rc > > This is grave, no vmlinuz is produced. > > > wl > > CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.o > CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd.o > CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p6.o > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p6.c:22: error: p6_hw_cache_event_ids causes a section type conflict > make[3]: [arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p6.o] Error 1 (ignored) > CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_knc.o > CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p4.o > CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.o > > ================================================ > There ocurs a compiling error in perf-event-p6.o , any regression, unfortunately I lost the compiling list but I think it was any incompatibility / redefinition with something else, pls check and correct that, if not already done > W.Landgraf Hi, I don't see this problem on 3.8-rc1 or -rc3. Maybe a difference/problem in gcc?? -- ~Randy