From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 21 Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 23:14:00 +0200 Message-ID: <3813680.TbHyagWbHe@wuerfel> References: <20160621185048.GR30909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160621185048.GR30909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Chris Metcalf , Sudip Mukherjee , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 8:50:48 PM CEST Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > So what's your build process for the cross tools, by the way? I'm assuming > > you're not doing a total bootstrap cross-tool build since you'd need minimal > > kernel headers (linux/errno.h or whatever) in that case. I assume you're using > > the host headers to build the cross tool? > > > > So I'm a little confused how the other kernel headers are working out for you, > > e.g. is referenced when building the tilegx libgcc. > > I've no idea; I use this thing: > > git://git.infradead.org/users/segher/buildall.git > > Although I've got some local modifications, none are to the actual > toolchain building part (although I suppose I should send segher a > patch). > > I have binutils-gdb.git and gcc.bit checkouts and point the buildall > config to that (both are on latest stable branches binutils-2_26-branch > and gcc-6-branch resp.). And I point the kernel path to my current > hacked up tree. > > I don't really rebuild the entire toolchains often, mostly only when I > really need a new GCC or its getting really old (like I used 5.3.0 for a > long while). I think the kernel headers are only needed for building glibc, which buildall.git doesn't use: it only does the initial stage of creating a cross-toolchain. Arnd