From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752003AbcFUUkt (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:40:49 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:46359 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751951AbcFUUkp (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:40:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 20:50:48 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Chris Metcalf Cc: Sudip Mukherjee , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 21 Message-ID: <20160621185048.GR30909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20160621124247.GM30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <5ed77f4c-44eb-ca02-1373-e878d3dea31e@mellanox.com> <20160621140408.GE3704@worktop> <20160621141435.GB7381@worktop> <94270f5c-1a28-f9d7-2b5a-eb874dc35398@mellanox.com> <20160621170607.GQ30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160621172918.GS30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160621182844.GT30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote: > On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >I had to s/__atomic_fetch/__atomic32_fetch/ to avoid a namespace clash > >with the builtin C11 atomic primitives. > > > >You want me to rename them all to regain consistent naming? > > Yes, it's probably the right thing to do. All the internal routines with "atomic32" > or "atomic64" I assume you mean? Yep, after this patch we have a few __atomic_ and a few __atomic32_, which is rather unbecoming. Lemme go convert them all to __atomic32_. > 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).