[04:47] <nidsub> hi there :)
[04:51] <nidsub> hola, i hope there someone out there who could help me :)
[04:52] <nidsub> im sorry ,but im really new to irc
[04:53] <nidsub> should i just post my problem here?
[04:53] <nidsub> im trying to build linux kernel
[04:54] <nidsub> here is the error i get,please  point out what did i do wrong
[04:54] <nidsub> nidsub-VirtualBox:/opt/codesourcery/linux-2.6-xlnx$ sudo make ARCH=arm
[04:54] <nidsub> scripts/kconfig/conf --silentoldconfig Kconfig
[04:54] <nidsub>   CHK     include/linux/version.h
[04:54] <nidsub>   UPD     include/linux/version.h
[04:54] <nidsub>   CHK     include/generated/utsrelease.h
[04:54] <nidsub>   UPD     include/generated/utsrelease.h
[04:55] <nidsub>   Generating include/generated/mach-types.h
[04:55] <nidsub>   CC      kernel/bounds.s
[04:55] <nidsub> cc1: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-mlittle-endian’
[04:55] <nidsub> cc1: error: unrecognized command line option ‘-mno-thumb-interwork’
[04:55] <nidsub> kernel/bounds.c:1:0: error: unknown ABI (aapcs-linux) for -mabi= switch
[04:55] <nidsub> kernel/bounds.c:1:0: error: bad value (armv5t) for -march= switch
[04:55] <nidsub> make[1]: *** [kernel/bounds.s] Error 1
[04:55] <nidsub> make: *** [prepare0] Error 2
[05:00] <nidsub> sorry but i dont understand the error
[05:04] <nidsub> please :(
[05:20] <nidsub> here the detail on the step i took ..from this webpage
[05:20] <nidsub> http://wiki.xilinx.com/zynq-linux
[05:20] <nidsub> please help me guys :(
[05:21] <nidsub> im stuck here
[05:43] <RAOF> nidsub: It looks like that's trying to use the armv5 ABI; we don't support that.
[05:43] <RAOF> What are you actually trying to do?
[05:44] <nidsub> hi,thanks for replying :)
[05:45] <nidsub> generally im planning to some embedded linux on xilinx arm cortex 9
[05:46] <nidsub> now im  trying to prepare the set of toolchain ready
[05:47] <nidsub> http://wiki.xilinx.com/zynq-linux from this page i would like to build a linux kernel for zynq qemu
[05:48] <nidsub> im sorry that if my explanation isnt complete,
[05:53] <RAOF> So, it looks like that kernel build is trying to use an (old) architecture that we don't support.
[05:53] <nidsub> ohh that why
[05:53] <RAOF> I think the answer might be that you can't build that kernel on Ubuntu, unless you can find a cross-compiler for armv5.
[05:55] <nidsub> thank you ,now im really confuis why would xilinx put an old kernel tree in git.xilinx
[05:56] <nidsub> git.xilinx.com/linux-2.6-xlnx.git
[05:59] <nidsub> just to be clear the problem here is bcoz of the kernel provide by xilinx right?
[05:59] <RAOF> That would seem to be the case.
[05:59] <RAOF> It's not an old kernel tree, it's a different arm architecture.
[05:59] <RAOF> (There are *lots* of ARM architectures)
[06:00] <RAOF> It seems to be trying to build an armv5t kernel; we don't support that instruction set, so I don't think our gcc knows how to build that instruction set.
[06:00] <nidsub> thats true :)
[06:01] <nidsub> thanks a lot RAOF, i was stuck here for one week..
[06:01] <nidsub> now it make sense
[06:02] <nidsub> i followed all the guideline by xilinx but they screwed me,hahah
[06:03] <nidsub> Thank you very much
[06:04] <nidsub> :) :) :)
[06:05] <RAOF> No problem.
[06:06] <nidsub> have a nice day :)
[10:42] <apw> GrueMaster, fsl-imx51 is off support, so we are only applying CVEs which are exploitable in the buildd environment, or fixes needed for buildds.  probabally there was nothing applied this cycle on that tree as a result
[10:42] <apw> bjf, ^^
[11:52] <ppisati> apw: right
[11:52]  * ppisati notes is so cold here, that the weather indicator sometimes crashes
[12:04] <diwic> "yo mama so fat, she won't fit in the message indicator"?
[12:05] <apw> ppisati, heh ... perhaps -NN is too wide
[12:22]  * cking acquires a replacement battery for an old Dell 1525 laptop. Not bad price, just hope it arrives and works..
[13:06] <tgardner> cking, I wonder if AMD processors will show CPU governor results similar to Intel.
[13:27] <cking> tgardner, hard to tell w/o AMD h/w.  Got any spare?
[13:27] <tgardner> cking, no desktop kit, just a large server cabinet
[13:28] <cking> maybe I should ask HWE
[13:28] <tgardner> hmm, maybe an older sempron. thats likely not worth shipping to the UK (especially since its mine)
[13:28] <cking> tgardner, no worries, I will see what vanhoof can get me
[13:29] <tgardner> cking, how about a Lenovo x120e with the duo-core AMD. that would be a good test platform, plus they are cheap
[13:30] <cking> at ~$465 sounds like an idea  
[13:31]  * cking suspects Windows is a significant chunk of the price
[13:32] <tgardner> cking, yeah, I think I remember paying the Windoze tax for mine.
[13:33]  * smb thinks the Dell 1721 may be amd, too. Ok, it currently has no hd and the keyboard and probably the wireless are toasted...
[13:33] <cking> smb, sounds like trash can fodder then
[13:34] <smb> cking, I mainly keep it because it could probably still yield a few spare parts
[13:34] <cking> like screws?
[13:34] <smb> Think the ram is ok
[13:34] <apw> and you think anything will take ram that old?  i think not
[13:35] <smb> The 1521 I also have like will do :)
[13:35] <apw> and whihc bits of that are missing?  cna you even make one good machine out of them, doesn't sound like it
[13:57] <jwi> cking: did you enable rc6 when testing the x220?
[13:58] <cking> jwi, not for the last batch of tests
[14:00] <jwi> cking: the increased thermal headroom should allow ondemand/performance (and to a lesser extent conservative) to spend more time in turbo P states
[14:02] <cking> jwi, ok, good point, however I just wanted to look at the current "out of the box" config for Precise at Alpha 2. I probably can fit in some time to re-test with rc6
[14:03] <cking> but as things stand, "ondemand" as Intel has stated, is optimal
[14:03] <tgardner> cking, seems like it would all be relative on the same platform.
[14:03] <cking> tgardner, yep, one would think so
[14:05] <diwic> cking, I have an AMD laptop, Dell Inspirion M101z IIRC
[14:06] <cking> diwic, thanks, but I think we've got one sorted now
[14:06] <diwic> cking, ok, cool
[14:11] <jwi> cking: thanks - i figured you would do another round of testing with the final release. now let's hope those turbo states don't turn out to be horribly inefficient... :)
[14:39] <apw> ogasawara, heads up ... i have a trio of patches for P, which are likely the majority of the solution for a trio of CVEs, these need testing in P so we can confirm they are a complete soln. ... will be pushing 'em if they build :)
[14:40] <ogasawara> apw: ack
[14:40] <ogasawara> apw: I'll probably start prepping an upload shortly after you push
[14:41] <apw> ogasawara, ack, did we get todays stable update already ??
[14:41] <ogasawara> apw: v3.2.5?  yep, tgardner got it yesterday.
[14:42] <apw> ogasawara, thats the one, it did seem very odd to have another stable quite so soon.  especially after the previous one not even compiling
[14:42] <apw> one can rely on the tgardner monster to drop a pile of stable in your lap on a regular basis :)
[14:43] <Beret> hey guys, I commented on https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/926310 and marked it confirmed - I apologize if that wasn't the correct workflow
[14:43] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 926310 in linux "USB failing" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[14:43] <tgardner> apw, there was no effective or functional difference. the rebase merely dropped the ASPM SAUCE patch that came down via stable
[14:43] <Beret> the bot had previously marked it incomplete
[14:44] <apw> tgardner, well indeed for us yes, but, i was more commenting on the randomness of the stable process these days
[14:47] <tgardner> apw, yeah, some days there appears to be no rhyme or reason
[14:47] <tgardner> apw, it also applied to Oneiric (the ASPM thingy)
[14:48] <tgardner> in the 3.0.y stable update
[14:49] <apw> yep, i assume we didn't have it there yet, so getting it there will make 4ironiX spuzz
[14:49] <tgardner> or it could break shit
[14:49] <apw> no it can't break shit, else stable would never have taken it, their manefesto says so, so net
[14:50] <apw> ner
[14:50]  * apw waits for flames to pour out of -proposed
[14:50]  * tgardner is skeptical
[14:50] <apw> they are very trustworthy, it says that too
[14:51] <tgardner> apw, its one of those patches that skirts the grey area between being a bug fix and being a new feature.
[14:52] <apw> heh, indeed
[14:52] <tgardner> I'll ask herton and bjf to drop it from Oneiric at the first sign of regression.
[14:52] <apw> they'll do that anyhow :)
[14:52] <tgardner> well, drop it with prejudice ?
[14:54]  * tgardner goes to find packaging for cking's new/old AMD laptop
[14:54] <cking> much appreciated tgardner
[15:12]  * amorphous feels like precise is faster than oneiric on his laptop
[15:13] <cking> subjective or real?
[15:14] <apw> cking, i had teh exact same reaction the day i upgraded.  i cirtainly felt that chromium was getting to the page quicker
[15:15] <apw> as to what is improved, or if its real, ... ymmv
[15:15] <cking> just the facts - no wishy washy feely stuff here
[15:16] <cking> ;-)
[15:16]  * apw has none to offer
[15:16]  * apw feels a new WI for cking
[15:16] <cking> noooooooooooooooooo
[15:16] <apw> [cking] figure out if apw has lost his mind, of it precise _is_ faster
[15:37]  * ogasawara back in 20
[15:50] <GrueMaster> apw: Thanks for the info (mx51).  I'm just trying to stay on top of everything.
[15:55] <jsalisbury> **
[15:55] <jsalisbury> ** Ubuntu Kernel Team Meeting - Today @ 17:00 UTC - #ubuntu-meeting
[15:55] <jsalisbury> **
[16:05] <apw> GrueMaster, np
[16:05] <apw> jsalisbury, gah
[16:18] <jsalisbury> apw, :-)
[16:22] <apw> ogasawara, ok those are pushed, note the tree as is needs an abi bump, but i am assuming you have one pending anyhoo
[16:22] <ogasawara> apw: yep, thanks
[16:30] <tgardner> apw, mumble meeting ?
[17:43]  * apw takes unity crashing his X server as a sign, and calls it a day
[17:53] <cking> apw has all the fun
[18:36]  * tgardner -> lunch
[19:42] <ogasawara> hrm, that's not good.  precise master-next test build causes boot to fail on i386
[19:42]  * ogasawara suspects the procfs patches
[19:43] <apw_> ogasawara: rip em
[19:43] <ogasawara> apw: ack. will let you know if it succeeds then.
[19:43] <apw_> cking: oi you off NOW
[19:43] <cking> heh, yep, will do
[19:43] <apw_> ck
[19:43] <apw_> cking: NOW
[19:44] <cking> indeedy do
[19:44]  * cking -> EOD
[19:44] <tgardner> apw: re: HPA. why is the no-partition issue file system specific ? 
[19:44] <tgardner> I'd think the solution is to leave HPA alone of there is no partition table.
[19:44] <tgardner> if*
[19:45] <apw_> to know how big the thing  inside thinks it is, to know if it overlaps
[19:46] <tgardner> apw_, right now the ata layer enables HPA based on native size v.s readsize. it doesn't really take partition tables into account, does it?
[19:46] <apw_> we may,be able to cope with most external media in userspace
[19:47] <tgardner> apw_, what about lvm and device mapper volumes ?
[19:47] <apw_> it bounds checks the partirion, and if it spans hpa then we diaablw
[19:47] <apw_> ifs not clear we can ttell
[19:48] <tgardner> yeah, raid disks likely won't have a partition table
[19:50] <apw_> me drinks more wine
[20:16] <psusi> are the config files for the various kernel flavors in the git repo somewhere?  I can't seem to find them