Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760613AbYFSPpa (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:45:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757183AbYFSPpM (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:45:12 -0400 Received: from smtp4.pp.htv.fi ([213.243.153.38]:57749 "EHLO smtp4.pp.htv.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751559AbYFSPpL (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:45:11 -0400 Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:43:35 +0300 From: Adrian Bunk To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Dave Airlie , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linus Torvalds , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: kerneloops.org: 2.6.26-rc possible regression in ext3 Message-ID: <20080619154335.GC2721@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> References: <4859F075.2050207@linux.intel.com> <21d7e9970806182242na130e47i85839c4550b4ba03@mail.gmail.com> <20080619081146.GC17630@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <485A61B5.90003@linux.intel.com> <20080619151016.GA2721@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <485A78CF.7050401@linux.intel.com> <20080619152500.GB2721@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <485A7AF4.4080307@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <485A7AF4.4080307@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1814 Lines: 47 On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 08:27:48AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > Adrian Bunk wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 08:18:39AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>> Adrian Bunk wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 06:40:05AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>>>> Adrian Bunk wrote: >>>>>> Expect a lot more of this to pop up in the future. >>>>>> Should we #error for gcc 4.3.1? >>>>> it/s better to find if the gcc guys made a testcase for this bug (they normally do) and >>>>> test based on that. >>>> The gcc Bugzilla contains a testcase. >>>> >>>> But how do you plan to integrate it into a kernel build? >>> we already have several of these. >>> Just look at scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh for an example of such a beast. >> >> Checking whether gcc supports some flags is easy. > > have you actually looked at this script? > You didn't, since the script doesn't check if gcc supports some flag. > It checks very specifically for a code generation pattern... > > Please go look at the script first before responding. I did look, but I missed the last pipe... Do we know for sure this bug can only trigger on 32bit x86? Or is there anything else I miss in gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh that allows to use this approach to check for wrong code generation caused by platform independent gcc bugs? 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 -- 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/