https://blogs.gentoo.org/ago/2020/07/04/gentoo-tinderbox/ Issue: x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-550.54.14 fails to compile. Discovered on: arm64 (internal ref: tinderbox_arm64) System: GCC-14-SYSTEM (https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Tinderbox/Common_Issues_Helper#GCC-14) Info about the issue: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Tinderbox/Common_Issues_Helper#CF0003
Created attachment 886753 [details] build.log build log and emerge --info
Strange, gives the impression that the test to check if need to pass "dev" failed (drm_helper_mode_fill_fb_struct in kernel/conftest.sh), but I can't get the test to fail even with gcc-14. Shame these tests output go straight to /dev/null (no logs either) so can't see what really happened here. Test does include the wrong-in-recent-kernels header though, but fwics that just makes it "always pass" with a warning, which is fine given this only needs to fail for unsupported <4.5 kernels. Maybe there's something special going on with arm64 that I don't see at the moment -- builds fine with gcc14 on amd64 for me anyhow, albeit only tried with a "make defconfig" 6.7.8 kernel (haven't tried 6.1.80).
(In reply to Ionen Wolkens from comment #2) > Strange, gives the impression that the test to check if need to pass "dev" > failed (drm_helper_mode_fill_fb_struct in kernel/conftest.sh), but I can't > get the test to fail even with gcc-14. > > Shame these tests output go straight to /dev/null (no logs either) so can't > see what really happened here. > > Test does include the wrong-in-recent-kernels header though, but fwics that > just makes it "always pass" with a warning, which is fine given this only > needs to fail for unsupported <4.5 kernels. > > Maybe there's something special going on with arm64 that I don't see at the > moment -- builds fine with gcc14 on amd64 for me anyhow, albeit only tried > with a "make defconfig" 6.7.8 kernel (haven't tried 6.1.80). works for me too on amd64 so this should be something arm64 related
May or may not be fixed in 550.67 given they finally fixed a (different) gcc14 issue and perhaps they picked this up too. Not that I see clear signs that it is so not too optimistic. Not that I actually tried this on arm64 myself, so no idea.
Is this fixed in newer versions?
(In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #5) > Is this fixed in newer versions? Would need someone with arm64 hardware to tell me, but given this bug was never updated in months and no users complained (not that we have many nvidia arm64 users), I think we can assume it is? Either way as far as the gcc-14 stable goes, this is ~arch only (not stable for arm64). Think I'll just close this, will see if it resurfaces.
