On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:42:03AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > + MPE, PPC > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:08 AM Nathan Chancellor > <natechancel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:28:03AM -0800, Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 7:22 PM kernel test robot <l...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Fangrui, > > > > > > > > FYI, the error/warning still remains. > > > > > > > > tree: > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > > > master > > > > head: 585e5b17b92dead8a3aca4e3c9876fbca5f7e0ba > > > > commit: ca9b31f6bb9c6aa9b4e5f0792f39a97bbffb8c51 Makefile: Fix > > > > GCC_TOOLCHAIN_DIR prefix for Clang cross compilation > > > > date: 4 months ago > > > > config: powerpc-randconfig-r031-20201113 (attached as .config) > > ^ randconfig > > > > > compiler: clang version 12.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project > > > > 9e0c35655b6e8186baef8840b26ba4090503b554) > > > > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): > > > > wget > > > > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross > > > > -O ~/bin/make.cross > > > > chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross > > > > # install powerpc cross compiling tool for clang build > > > > # apt-get install binutils-powerpc-linux-gnu > > > > # > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ca9b31f6bb9c6aa9b4e5f0792f39a97bbffb8c51 > > > > git remote add linus > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > > > git fetch --no-tags linus master > > > > git checkout ca9b31f6bb9c6aa9b4e5f0792f39a97bbffb8c51 > > > > # save the attached .config to linux build tree > > > > COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross > > > > ARCH=powerpc > > > > > > > > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <l...@intel.com> > > > > > > > > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): > > > > > > > > Assembler messages: > > > > >> Error: invalid switch -me200 > > > > >> Error: unrecognized option -me200 > > > > clang-12: error: assembler command failed with exit code 1 (use -v > > > > to see invocation) > > > > make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:281: scripts/mod/empty.o] Error > > > > 1 > > > > make[2]: Target '__build' not remade because of errors. > > > > make[1]: *** [Makefile:1174: prepare0] Error 2 > > > > make[1]: Target 'prepare' not remade because of errors. > > > > make: *** [Makefile:185: __sub-make] Error 2 > > > > make: Target 'prepare' not remade because of errors. > > > > > > > > --- > > > > 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation > > > > https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-...@lists.01.org > > > > > > This can be ignored. The LLVM integrated assembler does not recognize > > > -me200 (-Wa,-me200 in arch/powerpc/Makefile). I guess the GNU as -m > > > option is similar to .arch or .machine and controls what instructions > > > are recognized. The integrated assembler tends to support all > > > instructions (conditional supporting some instructions has some > > > challenges; in the end I have patched parsing but ignoring `.arch` for > > > x86-64 and ignoring `.machine ppc64` for ppc64) > > > > > > (In addition, e200 is a 32-bit Power ISA microprocessor. 32-bit > > > support may get less attention in LLVM.) > > > > This is also not a clang specific issue, I see the exact same error > > with GCC 10.2.0 and binutils 2.35. > > > > $ make -skj64 ARCH=powerpc CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc64-linux- olddefconfig > > vmlinux > > Does using a non 64b triple produce the same failure?
Yes, CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc-linux- produces the same failure. > > ... > > Error: invalid switch -me200 > > Error: unrecognized option -me200 > > There's a block in arch/powerpc/Makefile: > 248 cpu-as-$(CONFIG_40x) += -Wa,-m405 > 249 cpu-as-$(CONFIG_44x) += -Wa,-m440 > 250 cpu-as-$(CONFIG_ALTIVEC) += $(call > as-option,-Wa$(comma)-maltivec) > 251 cpu-as-$(CONFIG_E200) += -Wa,-me200 > 252 cpu-as-$(CONFIG_E500) += -Wa,-me500 > > Are those all broken configs, or is Kconfig messed up such that > randconfig can select these when it should not? Hmmm, looks like this flag does not exist in mainline binutils? There is a thread in 2010 about this that Segher commented on: https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/9859e645-954d-4d07-8003-ffcd2391a...@kernel.crashing.org/ Guess this config should be eliminated? Cheers, Nathan
