On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 11:20:40PM -0700, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c: In function 'ath9k_hw_spur_mitigate':
> drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c:4925: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:9199
>
> This is a driver that is in Linus' tree and has no patches in the
> linux-next tree.
>
> The original work around talked about applying the patch twice, so I
> applied the below patch.
Stephen,
this is also in wireless-testing. I also see this in linux-2.6
under b08cbcd4546445740c2a04291204b56f8baf7be2. Not sure how this didn't
get through linux-next.
Luis
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 09:46:57AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 11:20:40PM -0700, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c: In function 'ath9k_hw_spur_mitigate':
> > drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c:4925: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:9199
> >
> > This is a driver that is in Linus' tree and has no patches in the
> > linux-next tree.
> >
> > The original work around talked about applying the patch twice, so I
> > applied the below patch.
>
> Stephen,
>
> this is also in wireless-testing. I also see this in linux-2.6
> under b08cbcd4546445740c2a04291204b56f8baf7be2. Not sure how this didn't
> get through linux-next.
It seems the following I said (for pointing out that having twice the
same code is a good indication that common code should be factored out)
was too subtle a joke:
The patch has to be applied twice for fixing both copies of the
same code. :-)
When I said it has to be applied twice I really meant what I said:
$ git-show b08cbcd4 | patch -p1
patching file drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 5017 (offset 216 lines).
$ grep 37014 drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c
/* workaround for gcc bug #37014 */
/* workaround for gcc bug #37014 */
$
> Luis
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Hi Luis,
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:46:57 -0700 "Luis R. Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 11:20:40PM -0700, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c: In function 'ath9k_hw_spur_mitigate':
> > drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c:4925: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:9199
> >
> > This is a driver that is in Linus' tree and has no patches in the
> > linux-next tree.
> >
> > The original work around talked about applying the patch twice, so I
> > applied the below patch.
>
> this is also in wireless-testing. I also see this in linux-2.6
> under b08cbcd4546445740c2a04291204b56f8baf7be2. Not sure how this didn't
> get through linux-next.
That is only the first application of the patch, my patch is a fix of a
second instance of the same code. See Adrian's post.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:33:54PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:46:57 -0700 "Luis R. Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 11:20:40PM -0700, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
> > >
> > > drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c: In function 'ath9k_hw_spur_mitigate':
> > > drivers/net/wireless/ath9k/hw.c:4925: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:9199
> > >
> > > This is a driver that is in Linus' tree and has no patches in the
> > > linux-next tree.
> > >
> > > The original work around talked about applying the patch twice, so I
> > > applied the below patch.
> >
> > this is also in wireless-testing. I also see this in linux-2.6
> > under b08cbcd4546445740c2a04291204b56f8baf7be2. Not sure how this didn't
> > get through linux-next.
>
> That is only the first application of the patch, my patch is a fix of a
> second instance of the same code. See Adrian's post.
My bad...I'll fix it up w/ the next batch of fixes...
John
--
John W. Linville
[email protected]