linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Malta build errors with 2.6.26-rc1

To: "Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>
Subject: Re: Malta build errors with 2.6.26-rc1
From: "Dmitri Vorobiev" <dmitri.vorobiev@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:25:29 +0300
Cc: "Martin Michlmayr" <tbm@cyrius.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=YZUP72awik3Ta9l/m/RLf/XopbUh+VLLzGkUYDl3tUw=; b=sBY4rI9L7RsYRyV1jOZnXRs4CMN4Z/QV87TC2/3x5nXy2+afovzdqQAL6JYN4jZOeHSjdDIkfJux4BXDsnfjpG3xOirTGPGhdOBfFALgIfrXmk6d3xNzv1Y6nhE6ZYMWUkAm/EU1og0+QMtwXWW9CMNVPp3JS2HMAD8bC+CZusQ=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=IMuIQRKqiLZgquqikxftmqF4pZXddzXK32c8K0jLPni3O5PTQWbgo+JEGXSqygN09l3LCIRwm/JlrTi9Ek/So/MU7dZU2B4bJF4aPpP9GTlE51o4S2apqT/gLr834giT8iH42gaFQZv2Ysh7m+Fv5cE8rNZ70+a8Lx3rUax1U0Q=
In-reply-to: <20080528085033.GA6250@alpha.franken.de>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20080512163107.GA19052@deprecation.cyrius.com> <90edad820805121246o328d1cdaide88594ce9d328b7@mail.gmail.com> <20080528071240.GB10393@deprecation.cyrius.com> <20080528085033.GA6250@alpha.franken.de>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
> I didn't fix the problems above. The change to traps.c only fixes
> traps.c for 64bit builds and it's a totally different issue. Looking
> at the warning/errors someone needs to fix some data types and use
> CKSEG0ADDR(). I don't have the hardware, so I could only provide
> an untested patch, if no one else steps forward...

Please provide an untested patch. I have hardware here, so I can
perform the test for you.

Thanks,
Dmitri

>
> Thomas.
>
> --
> Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessary a
> good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>