New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

build: Use .S suffix for ppc64le assembly files #15373

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 31, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@kestrels
Contributor

kestrels commented May 31, 2017

The assembly file name suffix was changed from .S to .s,
which caused a build break on ppc64le architecture.

To fix this issue, the suffix will be changed back to .S
for ppc64le assembly files only. The x86 assembly files
can retain the .s suffix.

Fixes: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/20106
Signed-off-by: Andrew Solomon asolomon@us.ibm.com

build: Use .S suffix for ppc64le assembly files
The assembly file name suffix was changed from .S to .s,
which caused a build break on ppc64le architecture.

To fix this issue, the suffix will be changed back to .S
for ppc64le assembly files only.  The x86 assembly files
can retain the .s suffix.

Fixes: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/20106
Signed-off-by: Andrew Solomon <asolomon@us.ibm.com>
@kestrels

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kestrels

kestrels May 31, 2017

Contributor

@tchaikov
@branch-predictor
@smatzek

Different way of fixing the ppc64le build break, which #15358 is also attempting to fix.
This issue is blocking my progress on #15100.

Contributor

kestrels commented May 31, 2017

@tchaikov
@branch-predictor
@smatzek

Different way of fixing the ppc64le build break, which #15358 is also attempting to fix.
This issue is blocking my progress on #15100.

@kestrels

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kestrels

kestrels May 31, 2017

Contributor

@smithfarm
@bassam

Please let me know what you think.

Contributor

kestrels commented May 31, 2017

@smithfarm
@bassam

Please let me know what you think.

@bassam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bassam

bassam May 31, 2017

Member

@kestrels the revert looks OK to me to unblock you, however it might still cause issues with ccache v3.3.3 as described in #15142.

Member

bassam commented May 31, 2017

@kestrels the revert looks OK to me to unblock you, however it might still cause issues with ccache v3.3.3 as described in #15142.

@tchaikov

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tchaikov

tchaikov May 31, 2017

Contributor

i am good with this change. @bassam as this change only affects s390 build, so i guess ccache will still work fine with your change in #15142?

Contributor

tchaikov commented May 31, 2017

i am good with this change. @bassam as this change only affects s390 build, so i guess ccache will still work fine with your change in #15142?

@bassam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bassam

bassam May 31, 2017

Member

@tchaikov yes that's correct. we can revisit if someone complains about ccache on s390.

Member

bassam commented May 31, 2017

@tchaikov yes that's correct. we can revisit if someone complains about ccache on s390.

@tchaikov tchaikov merged commit b41a8bb into ceph:master May 31, 2017

3 checks passed

Signed-off-by all commits in this PR are signed
Details
Unmodifed Submodules submodules for project are unmodified
Details
default Build finished.
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment