On 2016-12-23 00:02, Ralf Ramsauer wrote: > On 12/22/2016 11:58 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2016-12-22 14:43, Ralf Ramsauer wrote: >>> `uname -m` might return 'armv7l', which is not the correct ARCH in this >>> case. The correct ARCH is arm. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Ralf Ramsauer <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> scripts/include.mk | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/scripts/include.mk b/scripts/include.mk >>> index 740e7b03..578d5683 100644 >>> --- a/scripts/include.mk >>> +++ b/scripts/include.mk >>> @@ -52,3 +52,6 @@ ARCH ?= $(shell uname -m) >>> ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64) >>> override ARCH = x86 >>> endif >>> +ifneq (,$(findstring arm,$(ARCH))) >>> +override ARCH = arm >>> +endif >>> >> >> Do we have such problems with arm64/aarch64 as well? > On `uname -m`, my TK1 reports 'armv7l', TX1 reports 'aarch64'. So I > guess other ARMv8 SoCs should report 'aarch64' as well, and arm32 > contain at least 'arm'.
But ARCH has to be 'arm64' on arm64... Jan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jailhouse" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
