From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N8ARq-0005Te-Se for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:29:10 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N8ARl-0005Sv-Pn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:29:09 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51761 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N8ARl-0005Sm-Jf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:29:05 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47136) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N8ARj-0003Zg-Um for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:29:04 -0500 From: Juan Quintela In-Reply-To: <200911110307.27227.paul@codesourcery.com> (Paul Brook's message of "Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:07:27 +0000") References: <20091105163741.GA3983@caradoc.them.org> <200911110307.27227.paul@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:28:37 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/2] Build fixes List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Brook Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Paul Brook wrote: > On Thursday 05 November 2009, Juan Quintela wrote: >> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 05:17:46PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote: >> >> How are you compiling? >> >> It works for me compiling in-tree with make -j3 (only 2 cores) >> > >> > I can reliably reproduce it by building all my QEMU configs at once. >> > I think that's a four-core or eight-core machine, -j4 in each build, >> > six separate qemu build trees. I've reproduced it in a single build >> > tree a couple of times, but not reliably. >> >> I have no way to reproduce reliablely :( > > rm -f qemu-tool.[od] config-host.h > make qemu-tool.o > > Reproduces reliably. > The following patch should expose any similar failures: My last series of build fixes serie fix this one also. They are already on staging. Thanks for the test case, Juan. > --- a/rules.mak > +++ b/rules.mak > @@ -44,5 +44,6 @@ cc-option = $(if $(shell $(CC) $1 $2 -S -o /dev/null -xc > /dev/ > @test -f $@ || cp $< $@ > > %.h-timestamp: %.mak > + sleep 60 > $(call quiet-command, $(SRC_PATH)/create_config < $< > $@, " GEN > $*.h > @cmp $@ $*.h >/dev/null 2>&1 || cp $@ $*.h > > > Paul