* Re: gcc 5.2 failures
2015-07-27 13:20 ` Bruce Ashfield
@ 2015-07-27 13:24 ` Yi Qingliang
2015-07-27 13:31 ` Bruce Ashfield
2015-07-27 13:52 ` Richard Purdie
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Yi Qingliang @ 2015-07-27 13:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Ashfield; +Cc: Otavio Salvador, openembedded-core
using gcc 5.1, the boost statechart library compile fail.
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Bruce Ashfield
<bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> wrote:
> On 15-07-27 05:30 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>
>> I've run a gcc 5.2 test build on the autobuilder:
>>
>>
>> http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Search/?items=10&query=3628c3c06fa4195003ac655bcc791acfac775173&limit=50
>>
>> 41 errors (with a few more pending).
>>
>> The good news is that if we tweak the security flags, the poky-lsb gcc,
>> elfutils, coreutils and iptables issues can be removed and I have a
>> patch for this. This leaves:
>>
>> 3.14 kernel failures for edgerouter, genericx86-64, qemuarm, beaglebone,
>> mpc8315e-rdb
>
>
> Gah. I had all these building with 5.1 .. chasing gcc is a pain
> with this older kernel.
>
>>
>> openssl issue for p1022ds
>>
>> u-boot on imx28evk, p1022ds, mpc8315e-rdb
>>
>> xf86-video-imxfb-vivante on imx6qsabresd
>>
>> linux-imx issue on imx53qsb
>>
>> Some kind of "random" qemu runtime issue (4 cases).
>>
>> At this point I think we likely need to enter bugs into the bugzilla for
>> each of these. If we want to switch 1.9 to use this (which I think is
>> desirable), we need to get this fixed as a priority.
>>
>> Bruce: How do you want to handle the 3.14 issues? Switch to 4.1? or fix
>> 3.14?
>
>
> Now that 4.1 is in place, and I can't really see a large user base that
> needs gcc 5.x with the linux-yocto 3.14 kernel (other folks using
> master with their own kernel's will obviously have to deal with the
> issue in their trees) .. join that with the fact that we need to update
> all the reference boards to 4.1 anyway, my suggestion is that we open
> bugs for the h/w reference updates (and I'll get the appropriate Wind
> River eyes on them) and walk away from burning more cycles on gcc 5.x
> and the 3.14 kernel.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>> Otavio: The freescale machines are looking unwell, can you help us make
>> sure the right people know about this?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: gcc 5.2 failures
2015-07-27 13:20 ` Bruce Ashfield
2015-07-27 13:24 ` Yi Qingliang
@ 2015-07-27 13:31 ` Bruce Ashfield
2015-07-27 13:50 ` Paul Eggleton
2015-07-27 13:52 ` Richard Purdie
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Ashfield @ 2015-07-27 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Purdie, openembedded-core; +Cc: Otavio Salvador
On 15-07-27 09:20 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 15-07-27 05:30 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>> I've run a gcc 5.2 test build on the autobuilder:
>>
>> http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Search/?items=10&query=3628c3c06fa4195003ac655bcc791acfac775173&limit=50
>>
>>
>> 41 errors (with a few more pending).
>>
>> The good news is that if we tweak the security flags, the poky-lsb gcc,
>> elfutils, coreutils and iptables issues can be removed and I have a
>> patch for this. This leaves:
>>
>> 3.14 kernel failures for edgerouter, genericx86-64, qemuarm, beaglebone,
>> mpc8315e-rdb
>
> Gah. I had all these building with 5.1 .. chasing gcc is a pain
> with this older kernel.
>
>>
>> openssl issue for p1022ds
>>
>> u-boot on imx28evk, p1022ds, mpc8315e-rdb
>>
>> xf86-video-imxfb-vivante on imx6qsabresd
>>
>> linux-imx issue on imx53qsb
>>
>> Some kind of "random" qemu runtime issue (4 cases).
>>
>> At this point I think we likely need to enter bugs into the bugzilla for
>> each of these. If we want to switch 1.9 to use this (which I think is
>> desirable), we need to get this fixed as a priority.
>>
>> Bruce: How do you want to handle the 3.14 issues? Switch to 4.1? or fix
>> 3.14?
>
> Now that 4.1 is in place, and I can't really see a large user base that
> needs gcc 5.x with the linux-yocto 3.14 kernel (other folks using
> master with their own kernel's will obviously have to deal with the
> issue in their trees) .. join that with the fact that we need to update
> all the reference boards to 4.1 anyway, my suggestion is that we open
> bugs for the h/w reference updates (and I'll get the appropriate Wind
> River eyes on them) and walk away from burning more cycles on gcc 5.x
> and the 3.14 kernel.
And of course, I remembered that we updated all the reference
boards to 3.19, so if 3.19 builds with gcc 5.2 (it may not), then
all we need to do is move the lsb reference to 4.1 and we'll also
be free of backporting :)
Bruce
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>> Otavio: The freescale machines are looking unwell, can you help us make
>> sure the right people know about this?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: gcc 5.2 failures
2015-07-27 13:31 ` Bruce Ashfield
@ 2015-07-27 13:50 ` Paul Eggleton
2015-07-27 13:55 ` Bruce Ashfield
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggleton @ 2015-07-27 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core; +Cc: Bruce Ashfield, Otavio Salvador
On Monday 27 July 2015 09:31:01 Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 15-07-27 09:20 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> > On 15-07-27 05:30 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> >> I've run a gcc 5.2 test build on the autobuilder:
> >>
> >> http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Search/?items=10&query=3628c3c06fa4
> >> 195003ac655bcc791acfac775173&limit=50
> >>
> >>
> >> 41 errors (with a few more pending).
> >>
> >> The good news is that if we tweak the security flags, the poky-lsb gcc,
> >> elfutils, coreutils and iptables issues can be removed and I have a
> >> patch for this. This leaves:
> >>
> >> 3.14 kernel failures for edgerouter, genericx86-64, qemuarm, beaglebone,
> >> mpc8315e-rdb
> >
> > Gah. I had all these building with 5.1 .. chasing gcc is a pain
> > with this older kernel.
> >
> >> openssl issue for p1022ds
> >>
> >> u-boot on imx28evk, p1022ds, mpc8315e-rdb
> >>
> >> xf86-video-imxfb-vivante on imx6qsabresd
> >>
> >> linux-imx issue on imx53qsb
> >>
> >> Some kind of "random" qemu runtime issue (4 cases).
> >>
> >> At this point I think we likely need to enter bugs into the bugzilla for
> >> each of these. If we want to switch 1.9 to use this (which I think is
> >> desirable), we need to get this fixed as a priority.
> >>
> >> Bruce: How do you want to handle the 3.14 issues? Switch to 4.1? or fix
> >> 3.14?
> >
> > Now that 4.1 is in place, and I can't really see a large user base that
> > needs gcc 5.x with the linux-yocto 3.14 kernel (other folks using
> > master with their own kernel's will obviously have to deal with the
> > issue in their trees) .. join that with the fact that we need to update
> > all the reference boards to 4.1 anyway, my suggestion is that we open
> > bugs for the h/w reference updates (and I'll get the appropriate Wind
> > River eyes on them) and walk away from burning more cycles on gcc 5.x
> > and the 3.14 kernel.
>
> And of course, I remembered that we updated all the reference
> boards to 3.19, so if 3.19 builds with gcc 5.2 (it may not), then
> all we need to do is move the lsb reference to 4.1 and we'll also
> be free of backporting :)
It would be nice if we were able to point to a set of fixes that people can
apply onto their older kernels in the migration guide for 1.9 though - I
guarantee we'll get people asking...
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: gcc 5.2 failures
2015-07-27 13:50 ` Paul Eggleton
@ 2015-07-27 13:55 ` Bruce Ashfield
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Ashfield @ 2015-07-27 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Eggleton, openembedded-core; +Cc: Otavio Salvador
On 15-07-27 09:50 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Monday 27 July 2015 09:31:01 Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> On 15-07-27 09:20 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>>> On 15-07-27 05:30 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>> I've run a gcc 5.2 test build on the autobuilder:
>>>>
>>>> http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Search/?items=10&query=3628c3c06fa4
>>>> 195003ac655bcc791acfac775173&limit=50
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 41 errors (with a few more pending).
>>>>
>>>> The good news is that if we tweak the security flags, the poky-lsb gcc,
>>>> elfutils, coreutils and iptables issues can be removed and I have a
>>>> patch for this. This leaves:
>>>>
>>>> 3.14 kernel failures for edgerouter, genericx86-64, qemuarm, beaglebone,
>>>> mpc8315e-rdb
>>>
>>> Gah. I had all these building with 5.1 .. chasing gcc is a pain
>>> with this older kernel.
>>>
>>>> openssl issue for p1022ds
>>>>
>>>> u-boot on imx28evk, p1022ds, mpc8315e-rdb
>>>>
>>>> xf86-video-imxfb-vivante on imx6qsabresd
>>>>
>>>> linux-imx issue on imx53qsb
>>>>
>>>> Some kind of "random" qemu runtime issue (4 cases).
>>>>
>>>> At this point I think we likely need to enter bugs into the bugzilla for
>>>> each of these. If we want to switch 1.9 to use this (which I think is
>>>> desirable), we need to get this fixed as a priority.
>>>>
>>>> Bruce: How do you want to handle the 3.14 issues? Switch to 4.1? or fix
>>>> 3.14?
>>>
>>> Now that 4.1 is in place, and I can't really see a large user base that
>>> needs gcc 5.x with the linux-yocto 3.14 kernel (other folks using
>>> master with their own kernel's will obviously have to deal with the
>>> issue in their trees) .. join that with the fact that we need to update
>>> all the reference boards to 4.1 anyway, my suggestion is that we open
>>> bugs for the h/w reference updates (and I'll get the appropriate Wind
>>> River eyes on them) and walk away from burning more cycles on gcc 5.x
>>> and the 3.14 kernel.
>>
>> And of course, I remembered that we updated all the reference
>> boards to 3.19, so if 3.19 builds with gcc 5.2 (it may not), then
>> all we need to do is move the lsb reference to 4.1 and we'll also
>> be free of backporting :)
>
> It would be nice if we were able to point to a set of fixes that people can
> apply onto their older kernels in the migration guide for 1.9 though - I
> guarantee we'll get people asking...
There's unfortunately no clean set of fixes, the mips one for
example, is a bit of a knarly backport in the assembly code.
If it was easy to point them out, we would have just done all
the ports :)
Bruce
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: gcc 5.2 failures
2015-07-27 13:20 ` Bruce Ashfield
2015-07-27 13:24 ` Yi Qingliang
2015-07-27 13:31 ` Bruce Ashfield
@ 2015-07-27 13:52 ` Richard Purdie
2015-07-27 13:55 ` Bruce Ashfield
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2015-07-27 13:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Ashfield; +Cc: Otavio Salvador, openembedded-core
On Mon, 2015-07-27 at 09:20 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 15-07-27 05:30 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > I've run a gcc 5.2 test build on the autobuilder:
> >
> > http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Search/?items=10&query=3628c3c06fa4195003ac655bcc791acfac775173&limit=50
> >
> > 41 errors (with a few more pending).
> >
> > The good news is that if we tweak the security flags, the poky-lsb gcc,
> > elfutils, coreutils and iptables issues can be removed and I have a
> > patch for this. This leaves:
> >
> > 3.14 kernel failures for edgerouter, genericx86-64, qemuarm, beaglebone,
> > mpc8315e-rdb
>
> Gah. I had all these building with 5.1 .. chasing gcc is a pain
> with this older kernel.
I'm not sure if this is a 5.1 verses 5.2 issue or not. I'm starting to
wonder if the SRCREVs we're using pull in the gcc 5.x fixes?
E.g. one of the failures was:
/home/pokybuild/yocto-autobuilder/yocto-worker/nightly-arm-lsb/build/build/tmp/work-shared/beaglebone/kernel-source/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h:106:30: fatal error: linux/compiler-gcc5.h: No such file or directory
which doesn't look "5.2".
> > Bruce: How do you want to handle the 3.14 issues? Switch to 4.1? or fix
> > 3.14?
>
> Now that 4.1 is in place, and I can't really see a large user base that
> needs gcc 5.x with the linux-yocto 3.14 kernel (other folks using
> master with their own kernel's will obviously have to deal with the
> issue in their trees) .. join that with the fact that we need to update
> all the reference boards to 4.1 anyway, my suggestion is that we open
> bugs for the h/w reference updates (and I'll get the appropriate Wind
> River eyes on them) and walk away from burning more cycles on gcc 5.x
> and the 3.14 kernel.
That seems reasonable to me, assuming we don't have an easy SRCREV fix
we've just missed/lost somehow...
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: gcc 5.2 failures
2015-07-27 13:52 ` Richard Purdie
@ 2015-07-27 13:55 ` Bruce Ashfield
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Ashfield @ 2015-07-27 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Purdie; +Cc: Otavio Salvador, openembedded-core
On 15-07-27 09:52 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-07-27 at 09:20 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> On 15-07-27 05:30 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>> I've run a gcc 5.2 test build on the autobuilder:
>>>
>>> http://errors.yoctoproject.org/Errors/Search/?items=10&query=3628c3c06fa4195003ac655bcc791acfac775173&limit=50
>>>
>>> 41 errors (with a few more pending).
>>>
>>> The good news is that if we tweak the security flags, the poky-lsb gcc,
>>> elfutils, coreutils and iptables issues can be removed and I have a
>>> patch for this. This leaves:
>>>
>>> 3.14 kernel failures for edgerouter, genericx86-64, qemuarm, beaglebone,
>>> mpc8315e-rdb
>>
>> Gah. I had all these building with 5.1 .. chasing gcc is a pain
>> with this older kernel.
>
> I'm not sure if this is a 5.1 verses 5.2 issue or not. I'm starting to
> wonder if the SRCREVs we're using pull in the gcc 5.x fixes?
Hmm. True enough, I'll double check, since I did have everything
building against 5.1 about a week ago.
>
> E.g. one of the failures was:
>
> /home/pokybuild/yocto-autobuilder/yocto-worker/nightly-arm-lsb/build/build/tmp/work-shared/beaglebone/kernel-source/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h:106:30: fatal error: linux/compiler-gcc5.h: No such file or directory
>
> which doesn't look "5.2".
>
>>> Bruce: How do you want to handle the 3.14 issues? Switch to 4.1? or fix
>>> 3.14?
>>
>> Now that 4.1 is in place, and I can't really see a large user base that
>> needs gcc 5.x with the linux-yocto 3.14 kernel (other folks using
>> master with their own kernel's will obviously have to deal with the
>> issue in their trees) .. join that with the fact that we need to update
>> all the reference boards to 4.1 anyway, my suggestion is that we open
>> bugs for the h/w reference updates (and I'll get the appropriate Wind
>> River eyes on them) and walk away from burning more cycles on gcc 5.x
>> and the 3.14 kernel.
>
> That seems reasonable to me, assuming we don't have an easy SRCREV fix
> we've just missed/lost somehow...
I'll get back to you on that one, I'm turning 5.x back on in my
local builds.
Bruce
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread