Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935888AbYBVBjL (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:39:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757478AbYBVBi4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:38:56 -0500 Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.128.185]:16017 "EHLO fk-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755846AbYBVBiy (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:38:54 -0500 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=bz+V4NGdb09uFDoa289gYS882XGlEO3HWVHLGBJ+ZPQvkOJCpVtaYrHsRqcVKvgzjQsQoxDoJTOzpks2SU8lx3Tg4rOxrzhlLPcwXwDFiVeQyBNGLA7s0rcRLuaUP5dZplIBpcs0lU1Au2OVXawiBRBobOZvVN4WOrdP9lLZbts= Message-ID: <29495f1d0802211738leb47f9ayf9b3ab6aa51b66cb@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:38:52 -0800 From: "Nish Aravamudan" To: "Sam Ravnborg" Subject: Re: [BUILD_FAILURE] 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 - Build Failure at acpi_os Cc: "Len Brown" , "Kamalesh Babulal" , "Andrew Morton" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, "Andy Whitcroft" In-Reply-To: <20080221222245.GB30976@uranus.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080216002522.9c4bd0fb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47B73DD8.4030405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <200802210208.47487.lenb@kernel.org> <29495f1d0802211054s26665d3cy1609d3347867cb16@mail.gmail.com> <20080221222245.GB30976@uranus.ravnborg.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2868 Lines: 70 On 2/21/08, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:54:40AM -0800, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > > On 2/20/08, Len Brown wrote: > > > On Saturday 16 February 2008 14:47, Kamalesh Babulal wrote: > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > > > > > The 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 kernel with randconfig build option, fails > > > > to build on x86_64 machine > > > > > > > > CC drivers/acpi/osl.o > > > > drivers/acpi/osl.c:60:38: error: empty filename in #include > > > > drivers/acpi/osl.c: In function 'acpi_os_table_override': > > > > drivers/acpi/osl.c:399: error: 'AmlCode' undeclared (first use in this function) > > > > drivers/acpi/osl.c:399: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once > > > > drivers/acpi/osl.c:399: error: for each function it appears in.) > > > > make[2]: *** [drivers/acpi/osl.o] Error 1 > > > > make[1]: *** [drivers/acpi] Error 2 > > > > make: *** [drivers] Error 2 > > > > > > > > # > > > > # Automatically generated make config: don't edit > > > > # Linux kernel version: 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 > > > > # Sun Feb 17 08:07:17 2008 > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > CONFIG_ACPI_CUSTOM_DSDT=y > > > > CONFIG_ACPI_CUSTOM_DSDT_FILE="" > > > > > > > > > garbage in, garbage out. > > > > garbage explicitly *allowed* by Kconfig in this case, though. > > > > > If you don't give this build option a file name where AmlCode lives, > > > then the build will be unable to find AmlCode[]. > > > > > > http://www.lesswatts.org/projects/acpi/overridingDSDT.php > > > > So we have a .config option whose sole purpose is to use another > > .config option? That seems ... less than ideal. Is there not some > > Kconfig voodoo we can do to only require the one option? Maybe > > something like how CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE is done? Adding Sam to the > > Cc, in case he has any ideas. > > > Make sure STANDALONE is y for your randconfig builds. > See README for examples. Hrm, if this is needed for randconfig to work, perhaps randconfig itself should somehow be specifying it? > STANALONE is there exactly to prevent the above but we cannot > control randconfig. While setting STANDALONE does fix the above, it doesn't answer the more basic question I had -- do we really need both .config options in this case? If it's simply a case of "That's how it is, won't be fixed, there are higher priorities", that's good enough by me. Just seems a shame that we have an option to enable another option, which is required for the first option to be sensible -- seems like we should only need the second option... Thanks, Nish -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/