On Tuesday, November 8, 2016 3:26:52 PM CET Olof Johansson wrote:
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Olof Johansson olof@lixom.net wrote:
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Arnd Bergmann arnd@arndb.de wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2016 9:16:28 AM CET Olof's autobuilder wrote:
Here are the build results from automated periodic testing.
The tree being built was stable-rc, found at:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git/
Topmost commit:
f821e08 Linux 4.4.31-rc1
Build logs (stderr only) can be found at the following link (experimental):
http://arm-soc.lixom.net/buildlogs/stable-rc/v4.4.30-35-gf821e08/
These seem to be largely caused by building with gcc-6. It's probably a good idea to keep supporting that configuration though and backport the fixes. Here are the upstream commit IDs I've found.
That's a lot of noise. I'll move back to build with gcc 4.9.2 instead, for now.
It's not entirely reasonable to expect older releases to build with new toolchains without warnings, and I'm not sure if it makes sense to bring back those fixes to -stable (unless they fix real bugs, of course).
A lot less noise with older gcc:
http://arm-soc.lixom.net/buildlogs/stable-rc/v4.4.30-44-gc5be865/
Out of the ones I mentioned earlier, that leaves
aaaab56dba9a ("of: silence warnings due to max() usage") badbda53e505 ("mm/cma: silence warnings due to max() usage")
but adds a couple of others:
| arch/powerpc/relocs_check.sh: line 46: ccache /usr/local/cross-4.9.2/bin/powerpc64-linux-objdump: No such file or directory | arch/arm64/Makefile:25: LSE atomics not supported by binutils
These seem to be caused by an older binutils release in your cross-4.9.2 build
| In file included from /work/build/batch/drivers/isdn/hardware/eicon/message.c:30:0: | /work/build/batch/drivers/isdn/hardware/eicon/message.c: In function 'mixer_notify_update': | /work/build/batch/drivers/isdn/hardware/eicon/platform.h:333:18: warning: array subscript is above array bounds [-Warray-bounds] | *(__le16 *)addr = cpu_to_le16(v);
This looks like a false-positive bug caused by 4.9 that is no longer present in newer compilers.
I assume this is the line
PUT_WORD(&(((CAPI_MSG *) msg)->info.facility_req.structs[1]), LI_REQ_SILENT_UPDATE);
Arnd