Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 15 Oct 2018 15:34:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:     Re: [PATCH v8 3/5] Cleanup ISA string setting
In-Reply-To: <20181014234639.GA14835@andestech.com>
CC:     linux@roeck-us.net, zong@andestech.com, nickhu@andestech.com,
        greentime@andestech.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        vincentc@andestech.com, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
To:     alankao@andestech.com
Message-ID: <mhng-48e07863-dd56-4ef6-8342-aa19414bc1b8@palmer-si-x1c4>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (MHng)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 16:46:40 PDT (-0700), alankao@andestech.com wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
>
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 05:02:05PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> With this patch in -next applied, I get the following error
>> when building riscv:defconfig.
>
> I guess what you meant was this commit:
> commit 0a5bee05fc67ce2044b8d91a18abbf14042da531
>
> The modification in Makefile was
>
> -endif
> -
> -KBUILD_AFLAGS += -march=$(KBUILD_MARCH)$(KBUILD_ARCH_A)fd$(KBUILD_ARCH_C)
> +# ISA string setting
> +riscv-march-$(CONFIG_ARCH_RV32I)       := rv32im
> +riscv-march-$(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I)       := rv64im
> +riscv-march-$(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_A)      := $(riscv-march-y)a
> +riscv-march-y                          := fd
> +riscv-march-$(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C)      := $(riscv-march-y)c
>
> and the ":= fd" line was wrong.  It should have been
>
> +riscv-march-y                          := $(riscv-march-y)fd
>
>>
>>
>> What am I missing ? Does RISC-V now require a new non-upstream compiler ?
>> Or a special version of make ? I am currently using GNU Make 4.1.
>
> So I sent the v8 to fix this problem.
> Sorry for the inconvinience.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Guenter
>>
>> ---
>
> And Palmer, it seems that the patch that causes this build error has been
> pulled into linux-next.  Any idea how to fix that one?

If I run into the new version then I'll overwrite in in my for-next branch.  I 
don't see one, though...