Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 06:42:07PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 02:27:58PM -0700, Vineet Gupta escreveu:
> > On 08/19/2016 02:10 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > >> But one question: when you test build, do you have any extra devel
> > >> > packages ins
Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 02:27:58PM -0700, Vineet Gupta escreveu:
> On 08/19/2016 02:10 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >> But one question: when you test build, do you have any extra devel
> >> > packages installed besides what is in this prebuilt toolchain tarball?
> >> >
> >> > I'll add at
On 08/19/2016 02:10 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> But one question: when you test build, do you have any extra devel
>> > packages installed besides what is in this prebuilt toolchain tarball?
>> >
>> > I'll add at least zlib and elfutils to the mix, building it in the
>> > docker image c
Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 04:23:02PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:01:49AM -0700, Vineet Gupta escreveu:
> > Awesome - I presume it ran to completion and builds perf successfully.
>
> Right, see full logs below.
>
> But one question: when you test build, do
On 08/19/2016 12:23 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> .
> But one question: when you test build, do you have any extra devel
> packages installed besides what is in this prebuilt toolchain tarball?
No - not when doing this with minimal cross tools - we do have Buildroot where
libelf and zlib a
Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:01:49AM -0700, Vineet Gupta escreveu:
> Awesome - I presume it ran to completion and builds perf successfully.
Right, see full logs below.
But one question: when you test build, do you have any extra devel
packages installed besides what is in this prebuilt toolchain ta
Al reported potential issue with ARC get_user() as it wasn't clearing
out destination pointer in case of fault due to bad address etc.
Verified using following
| {
| u32 bogus1 = 0xdeadbeef;
| u64 bogus2 = 0xdead;
| int rc1, rc2;
|
| pr_info("Orig values %x %llx\n", bogus1
On 08/19/2016 07:22 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:03:08AM -0700, Vineet Gupta escreveu:
>> On 08/18/2016 07:07 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>>> Are you aware of any readily available tarball or docker image that has
>>> a uclibc based devel env that I could
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:11:09PM -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On 08/17/2016 08:00 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> Just curious - why is that. The typical usage paradigm is check for return
> value
> and if 0 only then proceed to use the actual value.
>
> Also for discussion sake, will eliminating the int
On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 14:31 +0300, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> DW DMAC on ARC SDP became broken after df5c7386 ("dmaengine: dw: some
> Intel
> devices has no memcpy support") and 30cb2639 ("dmaengine: dw: don't
> override
> platform data with autocfg") commits.
I'm not sure that word 'broken' is a co
Em Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:03:08AM -0700, Vineet Gupta escreveu:
> On 08/18/2016 07:07 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Are you aware of any readily available tarball or docker image that has
> > a uclibc based devel env that I could grab? I'd add it to my build setup
> > to make sure I (and
11 matches
Mail list logo
