Linux 2.6.32.xx build breaks with gcc 4.7
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): x6lifb3o0t@gzp
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): x6vcecp44c@gzp
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): x6a9voowqv@gzp
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): x61uh0oun5@gzp
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): x6y5j7392k@gzp
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
lo lo,
I'm trying to compile 2.6.32.60 with gcc 4.7.2, and getting the following error:
CC arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.oarch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:1472:17: error: conflicting types for 'syscall_trace_enter' In file included from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h:130:0,
from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:10,
from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:22,
from include/linux/thread_info.h:56,
from include/linux/preempt.h:9,
from include/linux/spinlock.h:50,
from include/linux/seqlock.h:29,
from include/linux/time.h:8,
from include/linux/timex.h:56,
from include/linux/sched.h:56,
from arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:11:
/usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/ptrace.h:145:13: note: previous declaration of 'syscall_trace_enter' was here
arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:1517:17: error: conflicting types for 'syscall_trace_leave'
In file included from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h:130:0,
from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:10,
from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:22,
from include/linux/thread_info.h:56,
from include/linux/preempt.h:9,
from include/linux/spinlock.h:50,
from include/linux/seqlock.h:29,
from include/linux/time.h:8,
from include/linux/timex.h:56,
from include/linux/sched.h:56,
from arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:11:/usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/ptrace.h:146:13: note: previous declaration of 'syscall_trace_leave' was here make[2]: *** [arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [arch/x86/kernel] Error 2
make: *** [arch/x86] Error 2
My environment looks like:
Linux 3.2.30, glibc 2.16, gcc 4.7.2
If I comment out the ancient line, kernel compiles fine.
Willy says:
| The affected entry is only used there :
| arch/x86/include/asm/ptrace.h:extern void syscall_trace_leave(struct pt_regs *); | arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:/* work to do in syscall_trace_leave() */ | arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S: ENABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_ANY) # could let syscall_trace_leave() call | arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S: call syscall_trace_leave | arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S: call syscall_trace_leave | arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:asmregparm void syscall_trace_leave(struct pt_regs *regs)
| So if the two calls above don't need the include then maybe we can | safely remove it.
Quoted 53 lines · Gabor Z. Papp
lo lo,
I'm trying to compile 2.6.32.60 with gcc 4.7.2, and getting the following error:
CC
arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.oarch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:1472:17: error: conflicting types for 'syscall_trace_enter' In file included from/usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h:130:0,from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:10, from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:22, from include/linux/thread_info.h:56, from include/linux/preempt.h:9, from include/linux/spinlock.h:50, from include/linux/seqlock.h:29, from include/linux/time.h:8, from include/linux/timex.h:56, from include/linux/sched.h:56, from arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:11: /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/ptrace.h:145:13: note: previous declaration of 'syscall_trace_enter' was here arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:1517:17: error: conflicting types for 'syscall_trace_leave' In file included from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h:130:0, from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:10, from /usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:22, from include/linux/thread_info.h:56, from include/linux/preempt.h:9, from include/linux/spinlock.h:50, from include/linux/seqlock.h:29, from include/linux/time.h:8, from include/linux/timex.h:56, from include/linux/sched.h:56, from arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:11:
/usr/src/linux-2.6.32.60-gzpLinux/arch/x86/include/asm/ptrace.h:146:13: note: previous declaration of 'syscall_trace_leave' was here make[2]: *** [arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [arch/x86/kernel] Error 2
make: *** [arch/x86] Error 2My environment looks like:
Linux 3.2.30, glibc 2.16, gcc 4.7.2
If I comment out the ancient line, kernel compiles fine.
Willy says:
| The affected entry is only used there :
| arch/x86/include/asm/ptrace.h:extern void syscall_trace_leave(struct pt_regs *); | arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:/* work to do in syscall_trace_leave() */ | arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S: ENABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_ANY) # could let syscall_trace_leave() call | arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S: call syscall_trace_leave | arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S: call syscall_trace_leave | arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:asmregparm void syscall_trace_leave(struct pt_regs *regs)
Quoted 2 lines
| So if the two calls above don't need the include then maybe we can | safely remove it.
If someone knows this area well enough to judge whether we can
- either remove the asmregparm (I don't think so judging by recent commits saying it was possible to remove it after other main changes)
- or remove the declaration because noone else needs it,
Then I'd happily apply the fix. From what I understood, Paul would probably need the same fix for 2.6.34.
Thanks,
Willy