Searched hist:"6520 fe55" (Results 1 – 2 of 2) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/arch/x86/tools/ |
| H A D | relocs.c | fd952815307f0f272bf49fd364a7fd2f9992bc42 Wed May 23 16:02:34 CDT 2012 H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> x86-32, relocs: Whitelist more symbols for ld bug workaround
As noted in checkin:
a3e854d95 x86, relocs: Workaround for binutils 2.22.52.0.1 section bug
ld version 2.22.52.0.[12] can incorrectly promote relative symbols to
absolute, if the output section they appear in is otherwise empty.
Since checkin:
6520fe55 x86, realmode: 16-bit real-mode code support for relocs tool
we actually check for this and error out rather than silently creating
a kernel which will malfunction if relocated.
Ingo found a configuration in which __start_builtin_fw triggered the
warning.
Go through the linker script sources and look for more symbols that
could plausibly get bogusly promoted to absolute, and add them to the
whitelist.
In general, if the following error triggers:
Invalid absolute R_386_32 relocation: <symbol>
... then we should verify that <symbol> is really meant to be
relocated, and add it and any related symbols manually to the S_REL
regexp.
Please note that 6520fe55 does not introduce the error, only the check
for the error -- without 6520fe55 this version of ld will simply
produce a corrupt kernel if CONFIG_RELOCATABLE is set on x86-32.
Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> v3.4
fd952815307f0f272bf49fd364a7fd2f9992bc42 Wed May 23 16:02:34 CDT 2012 H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> x86-32, relocs: Whitelist more symbols for ld bug workaround
As noted in checkin:
a3e854d95 x86, relocs: Workaround for binutils 2.22.52.0.1 section bug
ld version 2.22.52.0.[12] can incorrectly promote relative symbols to
absolute, if the output section they appear in is otherwise empty.
Since checkin:
6520fe55 x86, realmode: 16-bit real-mode code support for relocs tool
we actually check for this and error out rather than silently creating
a kernel which will malfunction if relocated.
Ingo found a configuration in which __start_builtin_fw triggered the
warning.
Go through the linker script sources and look for more symbols that
could plausibly get bogusly promoted to absolute, and add them to the
whitelist.
In general, if the following error triggers:
Invalid absolute R_386_32 relocation: <symbol>
... then we should verify that <symbol> is really meant to be
relocated, and add it and any related symbols manually to the S_REL
regexp.
Please note that 6520fe55 does not introduce the error, only the check
for the error -- without 6520fe55 this version of ld will simply
produce a corrupt kernel if CONFIG_RELOCATABLE is set on x86-32.
Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> v3.4
fd952815307f0f272bf49fd364a7fd2f9992bc42 Wed May 23 16:02:34 CDT 2012 H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> x86-32, relocs: Whitelist more symbols for ld bug workaround
As noted in checkin:
a3e854d95 x86, relocs: Workaround for binutils 2.22.52.0.1 section bug
ld version 2.22.52.0.[12] can incorrectly promote relative symbols to
absolute, if the output section they appear in is otherwise empty.
Since checkin:
6520fe55 x86, realmode: 16-bit real-mode code support for relocs tool
we actually check for this and error out rather than silently creating
a kernel which will malfunction if relocated.
Ingo found a configuration in which __start_builtin_fw triggered the
warning.
Go through the linker script sources and look for more symbols that
could plausibly get bogusly promoted to absolute, and add them to the
whitelist.
In general, if the following error triggers:
Invalid absolute R_386_32 relocation: <symbol>
... then we should verify that <symbol> is really meant to be
relocated, and add it and any related symbols manually to the S_REL
regexp.
Please note that 6520fe55 does not introduce the error, only the check
for the error -- without 6520fe55 this version of ld will simply
produce a corrupt kernel if CONFIG_RELOCATABLE is set on x86-32.
Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> v3.4
|
| /openbmc/linux/arch/x86/ |
| H A D | Makefile | 24cc7fb69a5b5edfdff1d38c6a213d6a33648829 Thu Sep 20 09:28:45 CDT 2012 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.de> x86/kbuild: archscripts depends on scripts_basic
While building the SUSE kernel packages, which build the scripts,
make clean, and then build everything, we have been running into spurious
build failures. We tracked them down to a simple dependency issue:
$ make mrproper
CLEAN arch/x86/tools
CLEAN scripts/basic
$ cp patches/config/x86_64/desktop .config
$ make archscripts
HOSTCC arch/x86/tools/relocs
/bin/sh: scripts/basic/fixdep: No such file or directory
make[3]: *** [arch/x86/tools/relocs] Error 1
make[2]: *** [archscripts] Error 2
make[1]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
This was introduced by commit
6520fe55 (x86, realmode: 16-bit real-mode code support for relocs),
which added the archscripts dependency to archprepare.
This patch adds the scripts_basic dependency to the x86 archscripts.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>
|