From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Linux-Next <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the aio tree
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 08:41:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160204134142.GA16315@kvack.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160204131959.6695c7bf@canb.auug.org.au>
On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 01:19:59PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:03:39 +0100 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> > <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > >> Background: new aio code is adding __get_user() calls referencing 64
> > >> bit quantities (__u64 and __s64).
> > >
> > > There's lots more architectures which do not support 64-bit get_user()
> > > _or_ __get_user(): avr32, blackfin, metag for example, and m68k which
> > > has this interesting thing "/* case 8: disabled because gcc-4.1 has a
> > > broken typeof \" in its *get_user() implementation.
> >
> > And if you enable it again, you get lots of "warning: cast to pointer from
> > integer of different size", like you mentioned.
>
> Any thoughts? I am still using the version of tha aio tree from
> next-20160111.
I am still convinced that this is an architecture issue. Given that 64 bit
values work in the *get_user implementations on other architectures, I see
no reason there should need to be a workaround for this in common code.
-ben
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
--
"Thought is the essence of where you are now."
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: bcrl@kvack.org (Benjamin LaHaise)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: linux-next: build failure after merge of the aio tree
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 08:41:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160204134142.GA16315@kvack.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160204131959.6695c7bf@canb.auug.org.au>
On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 01:19:59PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:03:39 +0100 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> > <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > >> Background: new aio code is adding __get_user() calls referencing 64
> > >> bit quantities (__u64 and __s64).
> > >
> > > There's lots more architectures which do not support 64-bit get_user()
> > > _or_ __get_user(): avr32, blackfin, metag for example, and m68k which
> > > has this interesting thing "/* case 8: disabled because gcc-4.1 has a
> > > broken typeof \" in its *get_user() implementation.
> >
> > And if you enable it again, you get lots of "warning: cast to pointer from
> > integer of different size", like you mentioned.
>
> Any thoughts? I am still using the version of tha aio tree from
> next-20160111.
I am still convinced that this is an architecture issue. Given that 64 bit
values work in the *get_user implementations on other architectures, I see
no reason there should need to be a workaround for this in common code.
-ben
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
--
"Thought is the essence of where you are now."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-04 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-12 5:40 linux-next: build failure after merge of the aio tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-01-12 16:38 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-01-27 2:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-01-27 2:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-01-29 11:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-29 11:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-29 12:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-01-29 12:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-01-29 12:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-02-04 2:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-04 2:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-04 2:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-04 13:41 ` Benjamin LaHaise [this message]
2016-02-04 13:41 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 13:41 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 13:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 13:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 13:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 14:08 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 14:08 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 14:08 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 14:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 14:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 14:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 14:32 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 14:32 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 14:32 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 14:39 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 14:39 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 14:39 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 16:01 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:01 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:01 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:17 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 16:17 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 16:17 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-02-04 16:27 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:27 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:27 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:47 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:47 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 16:47 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 18:48 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 18:48 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-02-04 18:48 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-01-15 2:24 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-01-15 7:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-15 9:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-01-15 9:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-01-15 15:18 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-01-15 22:55 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-14 4:49 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-14 17:08 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-03-14 20:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-03-15 6:46 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-15 6:46 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-15 14:38 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-03-15 16:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-03-15 16:19 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2016-03-15 16:22 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-03-15 22:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-03-16 11:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-03-16 13:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-03-16 14:07 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2013-08-30 7:55 Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-30 14:26 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2013-08-30 17:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-30 17:42 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2013-08-21 7:45 Stephen Rothwell
2013-08-21 15:52 ` Dave Kleikamp
2013-08-21 23:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160204134142.GA16315@kvack.org \
--to=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.