Re: Kernel / utils-linux update breaks nvidia 390.xx driver dkms build - Any ideas what changed?

2024-05-08 Thread David C. Rankin

On 5/8/24 19:23, Doug Newgard wrote:

It's the GCC update, the driver will need patched


Thank you Doug!

  I figured it was something along those lines. It would have taken me a lot 
more digging to narrow it down!


--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.



Re: Kernel / utils-linux update breaks nvidia 390.xx driver dkms build - Any ideas what changed?

2024-05-08 Thread Doug Newgard
On Wed, 8 May 2024 19:03:33 -0500
"David C. Rankin"  wrote:

> AUR folks,
> 
>This is a general question that may catch others off guard. Having patch 
> for the 6.8 changes when the kernel was release and having no issues through 
> 6.8.9-Arch1, I was very surprised to see build failures in the nvidia-utils 
> 390.xx package after the today's update. For both Linux and Linux-LTS:

It's the GCC update, the driver will need patched


Kernel / utils-linux update breaks nvidia 390.xx driver dkms build - Any ideas what changed?

2024-05-08 Thread David C. Rankin

AUR folks,

  This is a general question that may catch others off guard. Having patch 
for the 6.8 changes when the kernel was release and having no issues through 
6.8.9-Arch1, I was very surprised to see build failures in the nvidia-utils 
390.xx package after the today's update. For both Linux and Linux-LTS:


( 8/13) Install DKMS modules
==> dkms install --no-depmod nvidia/390.157 -k 6.6.30-2-lts
Error! Bad return status for module build on kernel: 6.6.30-2-lts (x86_64)
Consult /var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/make.log for more information.
==> WARNING: `dkms install --no-depmod nvidia/390.157 -k 6.6.30-2-lts' exited 10
==> dkms install --no-depmod vboxhost/6.1.50_non_OSE -k 6.6.30-2-lts
==> dkms install --no-depmod nvidia/390.157 -k 6.8.9-arch1-2
Error! Bad return status for module build on kernel: 6.8.9-arch1-2 (x86_64)
Consult /var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/make.log for more information.
==> WARNING: `dkms install --no-depmod nvidia/390.157 -k 6.8.9-arch1-2' exited 
10
==> dkms install --no-depmod vboxhost/6.1.50_non_OSE -k 6.8.9-arch1-2
==> depmod 6.6.30-2-lts
==> depmod 6.8.9-arch1-2

  The actual errors seem like regressions somewhere as similar bugs were 
fixed in the past 3-4 years for both Nvidia and Vbox. The errors are:


In file included from 
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/conftest.h:5,
 from 
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv_stdarg.h:29,
 from 
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/os-interface.h:27,

 from 
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/nvidia/nv-frontend.c:12:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/conftest/functions.h:76:2: error: #error 
wait_on_bit_lock() conftest failed!

   76 | #error wait_on_bit_lock() conftest failed!
...

/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h: In function 
‘nv_ioremap_nocache’:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h:568:17: error: 
implicit declaration of function ‘ioremap_nocache’; did you mean 
‘ioremap_cache’? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]

  568 | void *ptr = ioremap_nocache(phys, size);
  | ^~~

/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h:568:17: error: 
initialization of ‘void *’ from ‘int’ makes pointer from integer without a 
cast [-Wint-conversion]
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h: In function 
‘nv_ioremap_nocache’:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h:568:17: error: 
implicit declaration of function ‘ioremap_nocache’; did you mean 
‘ioremap_cache’? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]

  568 | void *ptr = ioremap_nocache(phys, size);
  | ^~~
  | ioremap_cache

/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h: In function 
‘nv_is_dma_direct’:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.157/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h:1297:9: error: 
implicit declaration of function ‘dma_is_direct’; did you mean ‘d_is_dir’? 
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]

 1297 | if (dma_is_direct(get_dma_ops(dev)))
  | ^
  | d_is_dir

  All of these seem similar to earlier errors from the Linux 5.6 days. 
Anybody have a guess in what changed in either the new gcc or new util-linux 
or others that has cause all this fun?


--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.