On Tue, 26 May 2020, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 01:07:27PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > > I'll try to find out which optimization does this, because it is a
> > > slightly different scenario than hiding __noreturn from the callees.
> > > Probably -fno-ipa-pure-const agai
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 01:07:27PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > I'll try to find out which optimization does this, because it is a
> > slightly different scenario than hiding __noreturn from the callees.
> > Probably -fno-ipa-pure-const again.
>
> And it is indeed -fno-ipa-pure-const again.
On 5/25/20 3:10 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> On Thu, 21 May 2020, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
>> On 5/21/20 7:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Changes since 20200519:
>>>
>
> These are indeed caused by -flive-patching
>
>> on x86_64:
>>
>> fs/open.o: warning: objtool: chmod_common()+
> I'll try to find out which optimization does this, because it is a
> slightly different scenario than hiding __noreturn from the callees.
> Probably -fno-ipa-pure-const again.
And it is indeed -fno-ipa-pure-const again.
Miroslav
On Thu, 21 May 2020, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 5/21/20 7:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20200519:
> >
These are indeed caused by -flive-patching
> on x86_64:
>
> fs/open.o: warning: objtool: chmod_common()+0x104: unreachable instruction
> fs/namei.o: warning:
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 07:34:38PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 5/21/20 7:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20200519:
> >
>
> on x86_64:
>
> fs/open.o: warning: objtool: chmod_common()+0x104: unreachable instruction
> fs/namei.o: warning: objtool: do_renameat2(
On 5/21/20 7:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20200519:
>
on x86_64:
fs/open.o: warning: objtool: chmod_common()+0x104: unreachable instruction
fs/namei.o: warning: objtool: do_renameat2()+0x482: unreachable instruction
kernel/exit.o: warning: objtool: __ia32_sys_exit_
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 12:12:09AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20200519:
>
> My fixes tree contains:
>
> cd2b06ec45d6 ("device_cgroup: Fix RCU list debugging warning")
>
> The f2fs tree gained a conflict against the fscrypt tree.
>
> The drm-msm tree still had
Hi all,
Changes since 20200519:
My fixes tree contains:
cd2b06ec45d6 ("device_cgroup: Fix RCU list debugging warning")
The f2fs tree gained a conflict against the fscrypt tree.
The drm-msm tree still had its build failure so I applied a patch.
The kvm tree gained a semantic conflict against
Hi Masahiro,
On Tue, 21 May 2019 14:48:21 +0900 Masahiro Yamada
wrote:
>
> FYI.
> Commit 15e57a12d4df3c662f6cceaec6d1efa98a3d70f8
> is equivalent to commit ecebc5ce59a003163eb608ace38a01d7ffeb0a95
> which is already in the mainline.
>
> The former should be dropped, shouldn't it?
I have droppe
Hi Stephen, Andrew,
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 2:15 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
FYI.
Commit 15e57a12d4df3c662f6cceaec6d1efa98a3d70f8
is equivalent to commit ecebc5ce59a003163eb608ace38a01d7ffeb0a95
which is already in the mainline.
The former should be dropped, shouldn't it?
Thanks.
Hi all,
Changes since 20190520:
New trees: soc-fsl, soc-fsl-fixes
Removed trees: (not updated for more than a year)
alpine, samsung, sh, befs, kconfig, dwmw2-iommu, trivial,
target-updates, target-bva, init_task
The imx-mxs tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
Hi all,
Changes since 20150520:
The imx-mxs tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree.
The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree.
The drm tree lost its build failure.
The driver-core tree gained a build failure for which I applied a fix
patch.
Non-merge commits (relative
Hi Stephen.
On 05/23/2014 12:06 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Thu, 22 May 2014 12:45:05 +0200 Michael Kerrisk
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>> wrote:
>>> You should use "git fetch" as mentioned in the FAQ on the wiki
>>> (see below).
>>
>>
Hi Michael,
On Thu, 22 May 2014 12:45:05 +0200 Michael Kerrisk
wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > You should use "git fetch" as mentioned in the FAQ on the wiki
> > (see below).
>
> There does not seem to be anything in the rest of your message about
> t
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> You should use "git fetch" as mentioned in the FAQ on the wiki
> (see below).
There does not seem to be anything in the rest of your message about
this. Did I miss something?
Cheers,
Michael
--
To unsubscribe from this list
Hi all,
Changes since 20140520:
New trees: scsi-core and scsi-drivers
My fixes tree contains:
powerpc/ppc64: Allow allmodconfig to build (finally !)
The net tree lost its build failure.
The net-next tree still had its build failure but I used a supplied patch.
The mfd-lj tree still ha
Hi all,
Changes since 20130520:
The rr-fixes tree lost its build failure.
The crypto tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
next-20130520.
The drm-intel tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree.
The tty tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
next-20130520.
Th
18 matches
Mail list logo
