Re: linux-next: kbuild tree build failure

On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 04:55 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:

Hi,

On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Michael Ellerman wrote:

quoted

I don't really see why it "doesn't make sense" for users to input 64-bit
values, they're configuring addresses for a 64-bit kernel, so some of
the values are going to be 64 bit.

Do you really expect users to insert random 64bit addresses without making 
a mistake?

Well yes :)  But I think that's because you're thinking of 
"end-users" and I'm thinking of "users" like myself - ie. _I_ use
Kconfig and I do expect myself to be able to type a 64-bit address.

quoted

--- .config.orig	2008-07-08 09:30:00.000000000 +1000
+++ .config	2008-07-08 09:30:43.000000000 +1000

@@ -370,9 +370,8 @@
 CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_RPA=m
 CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_RPA_DLPAR=m
 # CONFIG_HAS_RAPIDIO is not set
-CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=0xc000000000000000
-CONFIG_KERNEL_START=0xc000000002000000
-CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x02000000
+CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=0xc0000000
+CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x2000000

Why is this worse? These are constants, you're not supposed to change them 
anyway.
The remaining values are generated in page.h and should be the same as 
before. If that isn't the case and this patch produces a nonworking 
kernel, I'd like to hear about it.

You're right the built kernel is fine. So it's not a bug, but I think it
is nicer to have the real values in the .config.

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab

wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person