On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 08:38:02AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Hi Alexei,
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 05:33:07PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 03:50:58PM -0700, a...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> >>From: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> >>Subject: kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 anon union
> >>initialization bug
> >>
> >>kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c: In function 'bpf_event_output':
> >>kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:312: error: unknown field 'next' specified in
> >>initializer
> >>kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:312: warning: missing braces around initializer
> >>kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:312: warning: (near initialization for
> >>'raw.frag.<anonymous>')
> >>
> >>Fixes: 555c8a8623a3a87 ("bpf: avoid stack copy and use skb ctx for event
> >>output")
> >>Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>
> >>Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <a...@kernel.org>
> >>Cc: David S. Miller <da...@davemloft.net>
> >>Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> >
> >Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <a...@kernel.org>
> >
> >Fengguang can you add gcc-4.4 to buildbot. Thanks!
>
> Sure. Currently we only test gcc-6. It'd be easy to test more versions
> concurrently, like
>
> gcc-4.4
> gcc-4.6
> gcc-4.8
> gcc-4.9
> gcc-5
> gcc-6
thanks! If you need to reduce the test matrix I don't see a concern
of dropping 4.6 and 4.8.
4.4 is good for old stuff, 4.9 is the most stable and 5/6 are good
for new warnings.
