* Re: [Regression] d96ac6f2: time: Revert ALWAYS_USE_PERSISTENT_CLOCK compile time optimizaitons [not found] ` <20130601184519.GA2349@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> @ 2013-06-03 18:08 ` John Stultz 2013-06-13 20:51 ` Jens Taprogge 0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread From: John Stultz @ 2013-06-03 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Taprogge Cc: Kay Sievers, Feng Tang, Jason Gunthorpe, ThomasGleixner, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable, gcc On 06/01/2013 11:45 AM, Jens Taprogge wrote: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 05:37:05PM +0200, Jens Taprogge wrote: >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 05:16:49PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: >>> On 05/31/2013 04:42 PM, Jens Taprogge wrote: >>>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:14:47PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Ok. None of this is yet making any sense to me. (And I worry >>>>> enumerating all the mix and match of configs that work or don't only >>>>> blurs the issues). >>>>> >>>>> Few base questions: >>>>> 1) What distro is this on? >>>> arch linux >>>> >>>>> 2) What gcc version are you using? >>>> gcc (GCC) 4.8.0 20130502 (prerelease) >>> (Sorry, I'm not very familiar with arch) Are you able to also >>> install a 4.7 gcc in parallel to try to build with? >>> >>> If so, you might want to try that. Your results are just weird >>> enough I want to just be sure we're not chasing compiler caused >>> ghosts. >> I will compile gcc4.6 and see if using that makes any difference. > I have compiled two of the broken configurations with gcc-4.6 and both > boot up. I am not sure how to proceed from here. Ok. That at least helps make me feel better that I'm not just crazy. First thing, I'd probably file a bug against the Arch gcc 4.8 package, just in case there's any out-of-tree changes there. I've also added the gcc mailing list to the thread to see if someone there can help narrow down what might be going wrong. thanks -john ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [Regression] d96ac6f2: time: Revert ALWAYS_USE_PERSISTENT_CLOCK compile time optimizaitons 2013-06-03 18:08 ` [Regression] d96ac6f2: time: Revert ALWAYS_USE_PERSISTENT_CLOCK compile time optimizaitons John Stultz @ 2013-06-13 20:51 ` Jens Taprogge 0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread From: Jens Taprogge @ 2013-06-13 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: John Stultz Cc: Kay Sievers, Feng Tang, Jason Gunthorpe, ThomasGleixner, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable, gcc On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 11:07:50AM -0700, John Stultz wrote: > On 06/01/2013 11:45 AM, Jens Taprogge wrote: > >On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 05:37:05PM +0200, Jens Taprogge wrote: > >>On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 05:16:49PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: > >>>On 05/31/2013 04:42 PM, Jens Taprogge wrote: > >>>>On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:14:47PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>Ok. None of this is yet making any sense to me. (And I worry > >>>>>enumerating all the mix and match of configs that work or don't only > >>>>>blurs the issues). > >>>>> > >>>>>Few base questions: > >>>>>1) What distro is this on? > >>>>arch linux > >>>> > >>>>>2) What gcc version are you using? > >>>>gcc (GCC) 4.8.0 20130502 (prerelease) > >>>(Sorry, I'm not very familiar with arch) Are you able to also > >>>install a 4.7 gcc in parallel to try to build with? > >>> > >>>If so, you might want to try that. Your results are just weird > >>>enough I want to just be sure we're not chasing compiler caused > >>>ghosts. > >>I will compile gcc4.6 and see if using that makes any difference. > >I have compiled two of the broken configurations with gcc-4.6 and both > >boot up. I am not sure how to proceed from here. > > Ok. That at least helps make me feel better that I'm not just crazy. > > First thing, I'd probably file a bug against the Arch gcc 4.8 > package, just in case there's any out-of-tree changes there. > > I've also added the gcc mailing list to the thread to see if someone > there can help narrow down what might be going wrong. Hello John, sorry for the delay. I was able to do some more testing. At first it seemed that things were working with gcc 4.8.1 (arch upgraded). However when I switched to Linux 3.9.5 I hit the same problems again. The config options are different. Some configs that worked with 3.9.4 broke, some that did not work boot now. I have seen boot failure with kernels compiled using gcc 4.6 as well. I will have to check which configuration that was. Since the arch package is unpatched I suspect, this is not an arch issue: https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk?h=packages/gcc I find it quite strange that I was unable to find reports of problems similar to mine on the web. Perhaps it is a firmware issue?! I have don't know much about the UEFI boot process. Perhaps the firmware expects some address to be alignment in a certain way? Best Regards, Jens ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-06-13 20:51 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <20130526192535.GA30367@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> [not found] ` <51A50AB7.8000804@linaro.org> [not found] ` <20130529204119.GA3976@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> [not found] ` <51A6A682.40303@linaro.org> [not found] ` <20130531010200.GA1385@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> [not found] ` <20130531120615.GA1442@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> [not found] ` <51A912C7.8090500@linaro.org> [not found] ` <20130531234242.GA1235@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> [not found] ` <51A93D71.30804@linaro.org> [not found] ` <20130601153705.GA1233@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> [not found] ` <20130601184519.GA2349@weetamoe.luzern.taprogge.wh> 2013-06-03 18:08 ` [Regression] d96ac6f2: time: Revert ALWAYS_USE_PERSISTENT_CLOCK compile time optimizaitons John Stultz 2013-06-13 20:51 ` Jens Taprogge
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).