From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:14:06 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: fix $(CROSS_COMPILE) prefix missing from size invocation In-Reply-To: <201112150228.34815.jkrzyszt@tis.icnet.pl> References: <1322186338-6020-1-git-send-email-jkrzyszt@tis.icnet.pl> <201112140021.42598.jkrzyszt@tis.icnet.pl> <20111214215815.GP32251@atomide.com> <201112150228.34815.jkrzyszt@tis.icnet.pl> Message-ID: <20111215221406.GY32251@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Janusz Krzysztofik [111214 16:59]: > On Wednesday 14 of December 2011 at 22:58:15, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Janusz Krzysztofik [111213 14:55]: > > > On Friday 25 of November 2011 at 02:58:58, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote: > > > > Otherwise, cross compilation may fail with error messages like: > > > > > > > > ... > > > > size: arch/arm/boot/compressed/../../../../vmlinux: File format is ambiguous > > > > size: Matching formats: elf32-littlearm elf32-littlearm-symbian elf32-littlearm-vxworks > > > > LD arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux > > > > arm-angstrom-linux-uclibcgnueabi-ld:--defsym _kernel_bss_size=: syntax error > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik > > > > > > Trying to guess why this patch is still sitting in the Incoming queue in > > > the Russell's patch system (7184/1) while others have found their way to > > > the Applied queue meanwhile, I wonder if this is because I didn't > > > mention explicitly that it is a fix to a regression introduced into > > > 3.2-rc with the following commit: > > > > It's because not all cross compiler in use have $(CROSS_COMPILE)size > > available, so it would have to be symlinked to host size to keep things > > compiling. So it's probably best to rather take the warning and keep > > things compiling rather than fix the warning and break compile for > > many people. > > First of all, thanks for someone finally commenting the patch. It's really hard for me to guess if a patch is OK or not if I hear nothing. Once I hear from someone what is wrong with my patch, I'm always willing to enhance it. But I feel more and more like an intruder on the linux-arm-kernel list. I thought this was already discussed a while back on the LAKML list? > Back to the merit: I would take that warning, as you suggest, if things were compiling for me, but it's not the case. Compilation fails, as I tried to state in the commit message. The patch was not about fixing the warning, but fixing the compilation broken. Since things worked for me before, I find it a regression. Sorry if I was not clear enough in the commit message. > > I'll prepare v2 which will call $(CROSS_COMPILE)size if size fails, OK? Sounds good :) Tony