Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Hi Masahiro, On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 15:22:09 +0900 Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > For today's linux-next, please squash the following too. > > (This is my fault, since scripts/mkuboot.sh is a bash script) > > > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.lib b/scripts/Makefile.lib > index 41c50f9461e5..2d72327417a9 100644 > --- a/scripts/Makefile.lib > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.lib > @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ UIMAGE_ENTRYADDR ?= $(UIMAGE_LOADADDR) > UIMAGE_NAME ?= 'Linux-$(KERNELRELEASE)' > > quiet_cmd_uimage = UIMAGE $@ > - cmd_uimage = $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(MKIMAGE) -A $(UIMAGE_ARCH) -O linux \ > + cmd_uimage = $(BASE) $(MKIMAGE) -A $(UIMAGE_ARCH) -O linux \ > -C $(UIMAGE_COMPRESSION) $(UIMAGE_OPTS-y) \ > -T $(UIMAGE_TYPE) \ > -a $(UIMAGE_LOADADDR) -e $(UIMAGE_ENTRYADDR) \ Umm, that seems to have already been done. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell pgpgbSPRBmOqR.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Hi Masahiro, On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 10:00:30 +0900 Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > Could you fix it up as follows? > I will squash it for tomorrow's linux-next. > > > --- a/arch/powerpc/Makefile.postlink > +++ b/arch/powerpc/Makefile.postlink > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ quiet_cmd_relocs_check = CHKREL $@ > ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64 >cmd_relocs_check = \ > $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/relocs_check.sh > "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" ; \ > - $(CONFIG_SHELL) > $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/unrel_branch_check.sh "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" > + $(BASH) $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/unrel_branch_check.sh > "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" > else >cmd_relocs_check = \ > $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/relocs_check.sh > "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" I added that in linux-next today. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell pgp3qMM2UYblH.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 10:00 AM Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 9:13 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > For today's linux-next, please squash the following too. (This is my fault, since scripts/mkuboot.sh is a bash script) diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.lib b/scripts/Makefile.lib index 41c50f9461e5..2d72327417a9 100644 --- a/scripts/Makefile.lib +++ b/scripts/Makefile.lib @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ UIMAGE_ENTRYADDR ?= $(UIMAGE_LOADADDR) UIMAGE_NAME ?= 'Linux-$(KERNELRELEASE)' quiet_cmd_uimage = UIMAGE $@ - cmd_uimage = $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(MKIMAGE) -A $(UIMAGE_ARCH) -O linux \ + cmd_uimage = $(BASE) $(MKIMAGE) -A $(UIMAGE_ARCH) -O linux \ -C $(UIMAGE_COMPRESSION) $(UIMAGE_OPTS-y) \ -T $(UIMAGE_TYPE) \ -a $(UIMAGE_LOADADDR) -e $(UIMAGE_ENTRYADDR) \ -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Hi Stephen, On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 9:13 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > > Presumably introduced by commit > > 1267f9d3047d ("kbuild: add $(BASH) to run scripts with bash-extension") > > and presumably arch/powerpc/tools/unrel_branch_check.sh (which has no > #! line) is a bash script. Yeah, is uses '((' and '))'. Thanks for catching this. Could you fix it up as follows? I will squash it for tomorrow's linux-next. --- a/arch/powerpc/Makefile.postlink +++ b/arch/powerpc/Makefile.postlink @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ quiet_cmd_relocs_check = CHKREL $@ ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64 cmd_relocs_check = \ $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/relocs_check.sh "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" ; \ - $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/unrel_branch_check.sh "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" + $(BASH) $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/unrel_branch_check.sh "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" else cmd_relocs_check = \ $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/arch/powerpc/tools/relocs_check.sh "$(OBJDUMP)" "$@" > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Hi all, After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: Presumably introduced by commit 1267f9d3047d ("kbuild: add $(BASH) to run scripts with bash-extension") and presumably arch/powerpc/tools/unrel_branch_check.sh (which has no #! line) is a bash script. Yeah, is uses '((' and '))'. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell pgpCUDP_5ifOy.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 01:58:03PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 20:47:58 +1000 > Nicholas Pigginwrote: > > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:44:55 +1000 > > Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:37:00 +0200 > > > Michal Marek wrote: > > > > > > > On 2016-08-19 07:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > I may be missing something, but genksyms generates the crc's off the > > > > > preprocessed C source code and we don't have any for the asm files > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > Of course you are right. Which means that we are losing type information > > > > for these exports for CONFIG_MODVERSIONS purposes. I guess it's > > > > acceptable, since the asm functions are pretty basic and their > > > > signatures do not change. > > > > > > I don't completely agree. It would be nice to have the functionality > > > still there. > > > > > > What happens if you just run cmd_modversions on the as rule? It relies on > > > !defined(__ASSEMBLY__), but we're feeding the result to genksyms, not as. > > > It would require the header be included in the .S file and be protected > > > for > > > asm builds. > > > > > > This seems like it *could* be made to work, but there's a few problems. > > > > - .h files are not made for C consumption. Matter of manually adding the > > ifdef guards, which isn't terrible. > > > > - .S files do not all include their .h where the C declaration is. Also > > will cause some churn but doable and maybe not completely unreasonable. > > > > - genksyms parser barfs when it hits the assembly of the .S file. Best > > way to fix that seems just send the #include and EXPORT_SYMBOL lines > > from the .S to the preprocessor. That's a bit of a rabbit hole too, with > > some .S files being included, etc. > > > > I'm not sure what to do here. If nobody cares and we lose CRCs for .S > > exports, then okay we can whitelist those relocs easily. If we don't want > > to lose the functionality, the above might work but it's a bit intrusive > > an is going to require another cycle of prep patches to go through arch > > code first. > > > > Or suggestions for alternative approach? > > Here is a quick patch that I think should catch missing CRCs in > architecture independent way. If we merge something like this, we > can whitelist the symbols in arch/powerpc so people get steered to > the right place. > > Powerpc seems to be the only one really catching this, and it's > only as a side effect of a test run for CONFIG_RELOCATABLE kernels, > which means version failures probably slipped through other archs. > > I'll clean it up, do some more testing, and submit it unless > anybody dislikes it or has a better way to do it. > > Thanks, > Nick > > > diff --git a/scripts/mod/modpost.c b/scripts/mod/modpost.c > index 4b8ffd3..1efc454 100644 > --- a/scripts/mod/modpost.c > +++ b/scripts/mod/modpost.c > @@ -609,6 +609,7 @@ static void handle_modversions(struct module *mod, struct > elf_info *info, > { > unsigned int crc; > enum export export; > + int is_crc = 0; should that not be a bool here ? > > if ((!is_vmlinux(mod->name) || mod->is_dot_o) && > strncmp(symname, "__ksymtab", 9) == 0) > @@ -618,6 +619,7 @@ static void handle_modversions(struct module *mod, struct > elf_info *info, > > /* CRC'd symbol */ > if (strncmp(symname, CRC_PFX, strlen(CRC_PFX)) == 0) { > + is_crc = 1; is_crc = true; > crc = (unsigned int) sym->st_value; > sym_update_crc(symname + strlen(CRC_PFX), mod, crc, > export); thx! hofrat
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 20:47:58 +1000 Nicholas Pigginwrote: > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:44:55 +1000 > Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:37:00 +0200 > > Michal Marek wrote: > > > > > On 2016-08-19 07:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > I may be missing something, but genksyms generates the crc's off the > > > > preprocessed C source code and we don't have any for the asm files ... > > > > > > > > > > Of course you are right. Which means that we are losing type information > > > for these exports for CONFIG_MODVERSIONS purposes. I guess it's > > > acceptable, since the asm functions are pretty basic and their > > > signatures do not change. > > > > I don't completely agree. It would be nice to have the functionality > > still there. > > > > What happens if you just run cmd_modversions on the as rule? It relies on > > !defined(__ASSEMBLY__), but we're feeding the result to genksyms, not as. > > It would require the header be included in the .S file and be protected for > > asm builds. > > > This seems like it *could* be made to work, but there's a few problems. > > - .h files are not made for C consumption. Matter of manually adding the > ifdef guards, which isn't terrible. > > - .S files do not all include their .h where the C declaration is. Also > will cause some churn but doable and maybe not completely unreasonable. > > - genksyms parser barfs when it hits the assembly of the .S file. Best > way to fix that seems just send the #include and EXPORT_SYMBOL lines > from the .S to the preprocessor. That's a bit of a rabbit hole too, with > some .S files being included, etc. > > I'm not sure what to do here. If nobody cares and we lose CRCs for .S > exports, then okay we can whitelist those relocs easily. If we don't want > to lose the functionality, the above might work but it's a bit intrusive > an is going to require another cycle of prep patches to go through arch > code first. > > Or suggestions for alternative approach? Here is a quick patch that I think should catch missing CRCs in architecture independent way. If we merge something like this, we can whitelist the symbols in arch/powerpc so people get steered to the right place. Powerpc seems to be the only one really catching this, and it's only as a side effect of a test run for CONFIG_RELOCATABLE kernels, which means version failures probably slipped through other archs. I'll clean it up, do some more testing, and submit it unless anybody dislikes it or has a better way to do it. Thanks, Nick diff --git a/scripts/mod/modpost.c b/scripts/mod/modpost.c index 4b8ffd3..1efc454 100644 --- a/scripts/mod/modpost.c +++ b/scripts/mod/modpost.c @@ -609,6 +609,7 @@ static void handle_modversions(struct module *mod, struct elf_info *info, { unsigned int crc; enum export export; + int is_crc = 0; if ((!is_vmlinux(mod->name) || mod->is_dot_o) && strncmp(symname, "__ksymtab", 9) == 0) @@ -618,6 +619,7 @@ static void handle_modversions(struct module *mod, struct elf_info *info, /* CRC'd symbol */ if (strncmp(symname, CRC_PFX, strlen(CRC_PFX)) == 0) { + is_crc = 1; crc = (unsigned int) sym->st_value; sym_update_crc(symname + strlen(CRC_PFX), mod, crc, export); @@ -663,6 +665,10 @@ static void handle_modversions(struct module *mod, struct elf_info *info, else symname++; #endif + if (is_crc && !mod->is_dot_o) { + const char *e = is_vmlinux(mod->name) ?"":".ko"; + warn("EXPORT symbol \"%s\" [%s%s] version generation failed, symbol will not be versioned.\n", symname + strlen(CRC_PFX), mod->name, e); + } mod->unres = alloc_symbol(symname, ELF_ST_BIND(sym->st_info) == STB_WEAK, mod->unres);
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:44:55 +1000 Nicholas Pigginwrote: > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:37:00 +0200 > Michal Marek wrote: > > > On 2016-08-19 07:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote: [snip] > > > > > > I may be missing something, but genksyms generates the crc's off the > > > preprocessed C source code and we don't have any for the asm files ... > > > > Of course you are right. Which means that we are losing type information > > for these exports for CONFIG_MODVERSIONS purposes. I guess it's > > acceptable, since the asm functions are pretty basic and their > > signatures do not change. > > I don't completely agree. It would be nice to have the functionality > still there. > > What happens if you just run cmd_modversions on the as rule? It relies on > !defined(__ASSEMBLY__), but we're feeding the result to genksyms, not as. > It would require the header be included in the .S file and be protected for > asm builds. This seems like it *could* be made to work, but there's a few problems. - .h files are not made for C consumption. Matter of manually adding the ifdef guards, which isn't terrible. - .S files do not all include their .h where the C declaration is. Also will cause some churn but doable and maybe not completely unreasonable. - genksyms parser barfs when it hits the assembly of the .S file. Best way to fix that seems just send the #include and EXPORT_SYMBOL lines from the .S to the preprocessor. That's a bit of a rabbit hole too, with some .S files being included, etc. I'm not sure what to do here. If nobody cares and we lose CRCs for .S exports, then okay we can whitelist those relocs easily. If we don't want to lose the functionality, the above might work but it's a bit intrusive an is going to require another cycle of prep patches to go through arch code first. Or suggestions for alternative approach? Thanks, Nick
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:37:00 +0200 Michal Marekwrote: > On 2016-08-19 07:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Nick, > > > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:38:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwell > > wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:09:48 +1000 Nicholas Piggin > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0200 > >>> Michal Marek wrote: > >>> > On 2016-08-17 03:44, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > > > WARNING: 25 bad relocations > > c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 > [...] > > Introduced by commit > > > > 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") > > > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > > > [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit > > > > 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") > > ] > > FWIW, I see these warnings as well. Any help from ppc developers is > appreciated - should the R_PPC64_ADDR64 be whitelisted for exported asm > symbols (their CRCs actually)? > >>> > >>> The dangling relocation is a side effect of linker unable to resolve the > >>> reference to the undefined weak symbols. So the real question is, why has > >>> genksyms not overridden these symbols with their CRC values? > >>> > >>> This may not even be powerpc specific, but I'll poke at it a bit more > >>> when I get a chance. > >> > >> Not sure if this is relevant, but with the commit reverted, the > >> __crc___... symbols are absolute. > >> > >> f55b3b3d A __crc___arch_hweight16 > > > > Ignore that :-) > > > > I just had a look at a x86_64 allmodconfig result and it looks like the > > weak symbols are not resolved their either ... > > > > I may be missing something, but genksyms generates the crc's off the > > preprocessed C source code and we don't have any for the asm files ... > > Of course you are right. Which means that we are losing type information > for these exports for CONFIG_MODVERSIONS purposes. I guess it's > acceptable, since the asm functions are pretty basic and their > signatures do not change. I don't completely agree. It would be nice to have the functionality still there. What happens if you just run cmd_modversions on the as rule? It relies on !defined(__ASSEMBLY__), but we're feeding the result to genksyms, not as. It would require the header be included in the .S file and be protected for asm builds. Stephen wasn't a fan of suck a hack and I can't say I blame him. Another possibility I suppose is an EXPORT_SYMBOL_ASM() variant that takes string containing C function declaration and just inserts it as an assembler comment somewhere that genksysms can find. Thanks, Nick
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On 2016-08-19 07:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Nick, > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:38:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwell> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:09:48 +1000 Nicholas Piggin wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0200 >>> Michal Marek wrote: >>> On 2016-08-17 03:44, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > WARNING: 25 bad relocations > c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 [...] > Introduced by commit > > 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit > > 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") > ] FWIW, I see these warnings as well. Any help from ppc developers is appreciated - should the R_PPC64_ADDR64 be whitelisted for exported asm symbols (their CRCs actually)? >>> >>> The dangling relocation is a side effect of linker unable to resolve the >>> reference to the undefined weak symbols. So the real question is, why has >>> genksyms not overridden these symbols with their CRC values? >>> >>> This may not even be powerpc specific, but I'll poke at it a bit more >>> when I get a chance. >> >> Not sure if this is relevant, but with the commit reverted, the >> __crc___... symbols are absolute. >> >> f55b3b3d A __crc___arch_hweight16 > > Ignore that :-) > > I just had a look at a x86_64 allmodconfig result and it looks like the > weak symbols are not resolved their either ... > > I may be missing something, but genksyms generates the crc's off the > preprocessed C source code and we don't have any for the asm files ... Of course you are right. Which means that we are losing type information for these exports for CONFIG_MODVERSIONS purposes. I guess it's acceptable, since the asm functions are pretty basic and their signatures do not change. Michal
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:09:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwellwrote: > Hi Nick, > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:38:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwell > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:09:48 +1000 Nicholas Piggin > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0200 > > > Michal Marek wrote: > > > > > > > On 2016-08-17 03:44, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > > > > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > > > > > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > > > > > > > > > WARNING: 25 bad relocations > > > > > c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 > > > > [...] > > > > > Introduced by commit > > > > > > > > > > 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") > > > > > > > > > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > > > > > > > > > [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit > > > > > > > > > > 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") > > > > > ] > > > > > > > > FWIW, I see these warnings as well. Any help from ppc developers is > > > > appreciated - should the R_PPC64_ADDR64 be whitelisted for exported asm > > > > symbols (their CRCs actually)? > > > > > > The dangling relocation is a side effect of linker unable to resolve the > > > reference to the undefined weak symbols. So the real question is, why has > > > genksyms not overridden these symbols with their CRC values? > > > > > > This may not even be powerpc specific, but I'll poke at it a bit more > > > when I get a chance. > > > > Not sure if this is relevant, but with the commit reverted, the > > __crc___... symbols are absolute. > > > > f55b3b3d A __crc___arch_hweight16 > > Ignore that :-) > > I just had a look at a x86_64 allmodconfig result and it looks like the > weak symbols are not resolved their either ... > > I may be missing something, but genksyms generates the crc's off the > preprocessed C source code and we don't have any for the asm files ... Looks like you're right, good find! Thanks, Nick
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Hi Nick, On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:38:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwellwrote: > > On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:09:48 +1000 Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > > > On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0200 > > Michal Marek wrote: > > > > > On 2016-08-17 03:44, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > > > > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > > > > > > > WARNING: 25 bad relocations > > > > c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 > > > [...] > > > > Introduced by commit > > > > > > > > 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") > > > > > > > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > > > > > > > [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit > > > > > > > > 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") > > > > ] > > > > > > FWIW, I see these warnings as well. Any help from ppc developers is > > > appreciated - should the R_PPC64_ADDR64 be whitelisted for exported asm > > > symbols (their CRCs actually)? > > > > The dangling relocation is a side effect of linker unable to resolve the > > reference to the undefined weak symbols. So the real question is, why has > > genksyms not overridden these symbols with their CRC values? > > > > This may not even be powerpc specific, but I'll poke at it a bit more > > when I get a chance. > > Not sure if this is relevant, but with the commit reverted, the > __crc___... symbols are absolute. > > f55b3b3d A __crc___arch_hweight16 Ignore that :-) I just had a look at a x86_64 allmodconfig result and it looks like the weak symbols are not resolved their either ... I may be missing something, but genksyms generates the crc's off the preprocessed C source code and we don't have any for the asm files ... -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Hi Nick, On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:09:48 +1000 Nicholas Pigginwrote: > > On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0200 > Michal Marek wrote: > > > On 2016-08-17 03:44, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > > > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > > > > > WARNING: 25 bad relocations > > > c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 > > [...] > > > Introduced by commit > > > > > > 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") > > > > > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > > > > > [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit > > > > > > 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") > > > ] > > > > FWIW, I see these warnings as well. Any help from ppc developers is > > appreciated - should the R_PPC64_ADDR64 be whitelisted for exported asm > > symbols (their CRCs actually)? > > The dangling relocation is a side effect of linker unable to resolve the > reference to the undefined weak symbols. So the real question is, why has > genksyms not overridden these symbols with their CRC values? > > This may not even be powerpc specific, but I'll poke at it a bit more > when I get a chance. Not sure if this is relevant, but with the commit reverted, the __crc___... symbols are absolute. f55b3b3d A __crc___arch_hweight16 -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0200 Michal Marekwrote: > On 2016-08-17 03:44, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Michal, > > > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > > > WARNING: 25 bad relocations > > c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 > [...] > > Introduced by commit > > > > 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") > > > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > > > [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit > > > > 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") > > ] > > FWIW, I see these warnings as well. Any help from ppc developers is > appreciated - should the R_PPC64_ADDR64 be whitelisted for exported asm > symbols (their CRCs actually)? The dangling relocation is a side effect of linker unable to resolve the reference to the undefined weak symbols. So the real question is, why has genksyms not overridden these symbols with their CRC values? This may not even be powerpc specific, but I'll poke at it a bit more when I get a chance. Thanks, Nick
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
On 2016-08-17 03:44, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Michal, > > After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > WARNING: 25 bad relocations > c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 [...] > Introduced by commit > > 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit > > 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") > ] FWIW, I see these warnings as well. Any help from ppc developers is appreciated - should the R_PPC64_ADDR64 be whitelisted for exported asm symbols (their CRCs actually)? Thanks, Michal
linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Hi Michal, After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc ppc64_defconfig) produced these warnings: WARNING: 25 bad relocations c0cf2570 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight16 c0cf2578 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight32 c0cf2580 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight64 c0cf2588 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___arch_hweight8 c0cf2678 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___bswapdi2 c0cf2690 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___clear_user c0cf26b8 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___copy_tofrom_user c0cf2728 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc___csum_partial c0cf3f90 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_copy_page c0cf40e0 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_csum_partial_copy_generic c0cf4100 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_current_stack_pointer c0cf4928 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_empty_zero_page c0cf4db0 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_flush_dcache_range c0cf4dc0 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_flush_icache_range c0cf6470 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_load_fp_state c0cf6488 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_load_vr_state c0cf68d0 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_memchr c0cf68e0 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_memcmp c0cf68e8 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_memcpy c0cf6900 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_memmove c0cf6988 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_memset c0cf9328 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_store_fp_state c0cf9330 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_store_vr_state c0cf93d0 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_strncmp c0cf93d8 R_PPC64_ADDR64__crc_strncpy Introduced by commit 9445aa1a3062 ("ppc: move exports to definitions") I have reverted that commit for today. [cc-ing the ppc guys for clues - also involved is commit 22823ab419d8 ("EXPORT_SYMBOL() for asm") ] -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell