Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

[Ingo Molnar]

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
> 
>   DESCEND  objtool
>   CC       /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/builtin-check.o
>   CC       /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/special.o
>   CC       /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/elf.o
>   CC       /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/objtool.o
>   MKDIR    /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/arch/x86/insn/
>   CC       /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/libstring.o
> elf.c:22:23: fatal error: sys/types.h: No such file or directory
> compilation terminated.
>   CC       /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/exec-cmd.o
>   CC       /home/sfr/next/x86_64_allmodconfig/tools/objtool/help.o
> builtin-check.c:28:20: fatal error: string.h: No such file or directory
> compilation terminated.
> objtool.c:28:19: fatal error: stdio.h: No such file or directory
> compilation terminated.
> 
> and further errors ...
> 
> This build is done with a PowerPC hosted cross compiler with no glibc.

Ugh, what a rare and weird way to build an x86 kernel, and you made linux-next 
dependent on it?

> I assume that some things here need to be built with HOSTCC?

I suspect that's the culprit. Do you now mandate people to have PowerPC systems as 
a requirement to merge to linux-next? How are people supposed to be able to test 
that rare type of build method which does not matter to 99.99% of our kernel 
testers and users?

Thanks,

	Ingo