Building h8300:allnoconfig ... failed
Building h8300:h8300h-sim_defconfig ... failed
Building c6x:dsk6455_defconfig ... failed
[ and more builds for the same architectures ]
--------------
Error log:
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x480): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_mprotect'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x484): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_alloc'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x488): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_free'
Other architectures (frv, xtensa, score) currently fail to build for other reasons,
so I don't really know if the above are the only ones affected.
Guenter
On Monday, September 12, 2016 7:55:33 AM CEST Guenter Roeck wrote:
Building h8300:allnoconfig ... failed
Building h8300:h8300h-sim_defconfig ... failed
Building c6x:dsk6455_defconfig ... failed
[ and more builds for the same architectures ]
--------------
Error log:
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x480): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_mprotect'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x484): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_alloc'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x488): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_free'
Other architectures (frv, xtensa, score) currently fail to build for other reasons,
so I don't really know if the above are the only ones affected.
I think the best solution would be to add them to kernel/sys_ni.c so we can
assign syscall numbers for all architectures regardless of whether they use it
or not (most of them will never use these AFAICT).
Arnd
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Date: 2016-09-12 15:03:57
On 09/12/2016 07:59 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday, September 12, 2016 7:55:33 AM CEST Guenter Roeck wrote:
quoted
Building h8300:allnoconfig ... failed
Building h8300:h8300h-sim_defconfig ... failed
Building c6x:dsk6455_defconfig ... failed
[ and more builds for the same architectures ]
--------------
Error log:
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x480): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_mprotect'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x484): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_alloc'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x488): undefined reference to `sys_pkey_free'
Other architectures (frv, xtensa, score) currently fail to build for other reasons,
so I don't really know if the above are the only ones affected.
I think the best solution would be to add them to kernel/sys_ni.c so we can
assign syscall numbers for all architectures regardless of whether they use it
or not (most of them will never use these AFAICT).
Urg, sorry about the breakage. I'll see if I can reproduce it and get a
patch out later today that does this.
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Date: 2016-09-12 20:09:20
On 09/12/2016 07:55 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Building h8300:allnoconfig ... failed
Building h8300:h8300h-sim_defconfig ... failed
Building c6x:dsk6455_defconfig ... failed
[ and more builds for the same architectures ]
--------------
Error log:
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x480): undefined reference to
`sys_pkey_mprotect'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x484): undefined reference to
`sys_pkey_alloc'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x488): undefined reference to
`sys_pkey_free'
So, I've done what Arnd suggested, but I don't have a working
cross-compiler than can do h8300 or c6x. Could you test the attached
patch and see if it gets things working for you?
Also, do you have a handy place to grab a cross-compiler for h8300
without having to build one? The kernel.org ones don't seem to work for
h8300.
On Monday, September 12, 2016 1:09:17 PM CEST Dave Hansen wrote:
So, I've done what Arnd suggested, but I don't have a working
cross-compiler than can do h8300 or c6x. Could you test the attached
patch and see if it gets things working for you?
Also, do you have a handy place to grab a cross-compiler for h8300
without having to build one? The kernel.org ones don't seem to work for
h8300.
I haven't tested it, but it looks good to me
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <redacted>
FWIW, you should be able to test this with an arm64 cross-compiler
too, many distros ship one.
Arnd
Hi Dave,
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 01:09:17PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 09/12/2016 07:55 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
quoted
Building h8300:allnoconfig ... failed
Building h8300:h8300h-sim_defconfig ... failed
Building c6x:dsk6455_defconfig ... failed
[ and more builds for the same architectures ]
--------------
Error log:
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x480): undefined reference to
`sys_pkey_mprotect'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x484): undefined reference to
`sys_pkey_alloc'
arch/h8300/kernel/built-in.o:(.data+0x488): undefined reference to
`sys_pkey_free'
So, I've done what Arnd suggested, but I don't have a working
cross-compiler than can do h8300 or c6x. Could you test the attached
patch and see if it gets things working for you?
Works for both h8300 and c6x. Feel free to add
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Also, do you have a handy place to grab a cross-compiler for h8300
without having to build one? The kernel.org ones don't seem to work for
h8300.
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:28:56PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday, September 12, 2016 1:09:17 PM CEST Dave Hansen wrote:
quoted
So, I've done what Arnd suggested, but I don't have a working
cross-compiler than can do h8300 or c6x. Could you test the attached
patch and see if it gets things working for you?
Also, do you have a handy place to grab a cross-compiler for h8300
without having to build one? The kernel.org ones don't seem to work for
h8300.
I haven't tested it, but it looks good to me
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
FWIW, you should be able to test this with an arm64 cross-compiler
too, many distros ship one.
arm64 builds fine, though, even w/o this patch (at least for me).
Guenter
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Date: 2016-09-12 20:34:59
On 09/12/2016 01:28 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
FWIW, you should be able to test this with an arm64 cross-compiler
too, many distros ship one.
arm64 build fine for me with and without the patch. There must be
something else specific to h8300 and the other broken architectures.
Is there some other part of the configuration that could be hiding the
issue in my arm64 build?