[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#519761: linux-libc-dev: conflict between <asm/byteorder.h> and <endian.h>



On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:23:59AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> [2009-03-15 00:09]:
> > linux-libc-dev has changed the way <asm/byteorder.h> declares endianness
> > related #define, and they conflict with <endian.h> at least on mips and
> > mipsel. This is something fixed upstream, please find below the upstream
> > patch and a less invasive patch.
> 
> I'm afraid both patches lead to:
> 
>   CC      arch/mips/kernel/asm-offsets.s
> In file included from /home/tbm/kernel/linux-2.6-2.6.28/debian/build/build_mips_none_4kc-malta/arch/mips/include/asm/byteorder.h:17,
>                  from /home/tbm/kernel/linux-2.6-2.6.28/debian/build/build_mips_none_4kc-malta/arch/mips/include/asm/bitops.h:21,
>                  from include/linux/bitops.h:17,
>                  from include/linux/kernel.h:15,
>                  from include/linux/sched.h:52,
>                  from arch/mips/kernel/asm-offsets.c:13:
> include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h: In function ‘__cpu_to_le64p’:
> include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h:46: error: implicit declaration of function ‘__swab64p’
> In file included from include/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h:106,
>                  from /home/tbm/kernel/linux-2.6-2.6.28/debian/build/build_mips_none_4kc-malta/arch/mips/include/asm/byteorder.h:17,
>                  from /home/tbm/kernel/linux-2.6-2.6.28/debian/build/build_mips_none_4kc-malta/arch/mips/include/asm/bitops.h:21,
>                  from include/linux/bitops.h:17,
>                  from include/linux/kernel.h:15,
>                  from include/linux/sched.h:52,
>                  from arch/mips/kernel/asm-offsets.c:13:
> include/linux/byteorder/generic.h: In function ‘le64_add_cpu’:
> include/linux/byteorder/generic.h:155: error: implicit declaration of function ‘__fswab64’
> make[1]: *** [arch/mips/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error 1
> 

I am afraid we will have to wait for 2.6.29. Given the numerous upstream
changes affecting byteorder, we may break something trying to backport
those changes.

-- 
Aurelien Jarno	                        GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net



Reply to: