From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAA31C4320A for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 12:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A67C661181 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 12:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243783AbhHFMm4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2021 08:42:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34120 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236860AbhHFMmy (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2021 08:42:54 -0400 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6B70C061798 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 05:42:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1628253756; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=BL6YlCbDsEAPs5DxI2P6UUekxLwuhdaTTldWOudLzxk=; b=Plmi6EgMBRKNKCY/J/6RABCCHGJxeYDbPVIYfj9AZQLMpE33fuD8BxbUHJ3nh1OPiiPmy8 jUcl/quDEV0IV9B3m+RaEmkcWhn711Z3YLab2aYcEr82i7cnk1vTRe5iA6Nx+ldm8rHAZ4 A0ogla4fHGxhg8QtRrePvxh3vql+ocKsd1y3/X51taOq4ZG77Xzw7c+555JK3GDvRH8H1C rGHfUXzWLsoEi/yR6akbVlpgtfso9p/lwb3E3U7q53bEhRuQ/drDSVr4ehTMkiqeUE9u9s TWxWO0SJuZcD7MTHVTDyD3eqdt6haWzpZz8n0zVN0P4hZxQBds3djquF9u9Flg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1628253756; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=BL6YlCbDsEAPs5DxI2P6UUekxLwuhdaTTldWOudLzxk=; b=JiGJMbqH2M8Bl14Nv4Ka8ofDarNV4zT1AuEIHfZvIxcI/409xVneh6FtNmFe16czxBw5GJ bHdFAXRrjsjopaDw== To: "Chen, Rong A" , Dave Hansen , kernel test robot , Dave Hansen Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Linux Memory Management List Subject: Re: [kbuild-all] Re: sparc64-linux-gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-mxsave' In-Reply-To: <8bee8632-9129-bb02-ab94-f65786e65268@intel.com> References: <202107271153.7QWf3g6F-lkp@intel.com> <8bee8632-9129-bb02-ab94-f65786e65268@intel.com> Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 14:42:36 +0200 Message-ID: <87a6lu68xv.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 04 2021 at 17:04, Rong A. Chen wrote: > On 7/27/2021 10:52 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: >> On 7/26/21 8:11 PM, kernel test robot wrote: >>>>> sparc64-linux-gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-mxsave' >> >> Is there something else funky going on here? All of the "-mxsave" flags >> that I can find are under checks for x86 builds, like: >> >> ifeq ($(CAN_BUILD_I386),1) >> $(BINARIES_32): CFLAGS += -m32 -mxsave >> .. >> >> I'm confused how we could have a sparc64 compiler (and only a sparc64 >> compiler) that would end up with "-mxsave" in CFLAGS. > > Hi Dave, > > We can reproduce the error and have no idea too, but we have disabled > the test for selftests on non-x86 arch. This smells like a host/target compiler mixup. Can you please make the kernel build verbose with 'V=1' and provide the full build output? Thanks, tglx