From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755916AbYHYMlV (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:41:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753937AbYHYMlL (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:41:11 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:55855 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753832AbYHYMlK (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:41:10 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:40:54 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, David Miller , LKML Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure Message-ID: <20080825124054.GD8663@elte.hu> References: <20080825212833.38550575.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080825212833.38550575.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > Today's linux-next build (sparc64 defconfig) failed like this: > > ERROR: "__BUILD_BUG_ON_non_constant" [drivers/net/sunvnet.ko] undefined! > ERROR: "__BUILD_BUG_ON_non_constant" [drivers/block/sunvdc.ko] undefined! > > Probably intorduced by commit f5b5d41dd51a31fe70e3a04fb80a3b90b84c6a4e > ("debug: fix BUILD_BUG_ON() for non-constant expressions"). > > The preprocessed code looks like this: > > static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) u32 vio_dring_avail(struct vio_dring_state *dr, > unsigned int ring_size) > { > do { (void)sizeof(char[1 - 2*!!(!is_power_of_2(ring_size))]); if (!__builtin_constant_p(!is_power_of_2(ring_size))) __BUILD_BUG_ON_non_constant++; } while (0); > > return (dr->pending - > ((dr->prod - dr->cons) & (ring_size - 1))); > } > > I tried turning the above inline function into a macro to no avail. > > I applied the following patch (which is probably not what is wanted, > but puts back what was there before). > > I see from LKML that this definition of BUILD_BUG_ON is to be > replaced, so this is just a temporary measure. yeah. Note that it will only be stricter, so more fallout is expected. Ingo