From: Chen G. F T <che...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 02:12:09
|
On 07/04/2013 10:03 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 09:49 +0800, Chen Gang wrote: > >> > Hmm... at least, it is neither architectures issue nor modules issue. >> > >> > So we have to look for who have duty for it, since it is a 'generic' >> > issue for many architectures and modules, we have to find it in >> > 'generic' area (e.g. "./include/*"). >> > >> > At least now, it seems only "asm-generic/*" can play the unlucky role !! >> > >> > Or, do you think it is still the modules issue themselves ? > What problem are you trying to solve? asm-generic has been around for a > long time, and so has allmodconfig. I'm unaware of any issues with > either of them. > Select "COMPILE_TEST=y" with allmodconfig, but can not pass compiling in many architectures, one of the most reasons is "HW does not support". 'asm-generic' is really existent for a long time, and make an important role for both architectures and modules. > But as my last email got blocked because your ISP thinks my ISP is a > spambot (it's road runner, which I'm sure there are spammers), you wont > get this anyway. Oh, sorry for not reply the original mail, and did not see in my backup mail, now, I can use my backup mail to continue. Thanks. -- Chen Gang |
From: Steven R. <ro...@go...> - 2013-07-04 02:29:46
|
On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 10:10 +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: > Select "COMPILE_TEST=y" with allmodconfig, but can not pass compiling in > many architectures, one of the most reasons is "HW does not support". > > 'asm-generic' is really existent for a long time, and make an important > role for both architectures and modules. > The purpose of asm-generic is to add a standard infrastructure that some archs may be able to optimize. It's not so that all archs can compile all modules. I'm still confused by what you are trying to accomplish. -- Steve |
From: Chen G. F T <che...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 02:44:20
|
On 07/04/2013 10:29 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 10:10 +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: > >> > Select "COMPILE_TEST=y" with allmodconfig, but can not pass compiling in >> > many architectures, one of the most reasons is "HW does not support". >> > >> > 'asm-generic' is really existent for a long time, and make an important >> > role for both architectures and modules. >> > > The purpose of asm-generic is to add a standard infrastructure that some > archs may be able to optimize. It's not so that all archs can compile > all modules. > Yes, I can understand. But at present, it seems only 'asm-generic' can play the unlucky role for current issues (at least, it is neither architectures issue nor modules issue). Hmm..., I think maybe also has another way: get rid of 'COMPILE_TEST' (regress the related patch, which is only existent in next-* tree). Or could you provide your suggestions or completions about it ? Thanks. > I'm still confused by what you are trying to accomplish. Currently, I am trying to compile all architectures with allmodconfig in next-* tree (which will have "COMPILE_TEST=y"). So I can find and solve the related issues (I am one of contributors). One of main issues is about it. Thanks. -- Chen Gang |
From: Steven R. <ro...@go...> - 2013-07-04 03:06:53
|
On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 10:42 +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: > Hmm..., I think maybe also has another way: get rid of 'COMPILE_TEST' > (regress the related patch, which is only existent in next-* tree). I'm not working on linux-next at the moment. Hmm, I'm not even working on mainline at the moment, the kernel I have is still 3.10-rc5. > > Or could you provide your suggestions or completions about it ? > > Thanks. > > > I'm still confused by what you are trying to accomplish. > > Currently, I am trying to compile all architectures with allmodconfig in > next-* tree (which will have "COMPILE_TEST=y"). > > So I can find and solve the related issues (I am one of contributors). > So, you want all archs to pass an allmodconfig? Well, one thing is, if a module doesn't build for an arch, then why not keep that module from building for that arch. If module foo.ko doesn't build for arch bazinga, then just add in the Kconfig for the module foo: config FOO depends on !BAZINGA Then that module wont build for the specific arch, and all are happy. If someone someday wants to support module foo for arch bazinga, then they can fix module foo for that arch. -- Steve |