From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:44:55 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160819204455.6351ffb8@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5babe9ef-0e3d-6975-9ba4-9a29a700b24d@suse.cz>
On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:37:00 +0200
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> wrote:
> On 2016-08-19 07:09, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Nick,
> >
> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:38:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:09:48 +1000 Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0200
> >>> Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz> 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
> >>>>> c000000000cf2570 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.
> >>
> >> 00000000f55b3b3d 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-19 10:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-17 1:44 linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-08-17 12:59 ` Michal Marek
2016-08-18 1:09 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-08-19 3:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-08-19 5:09 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-08-19 5:32 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-08-19 8:37 ` Michal Marek
2016-08-19 10:44 ` Nicholas Piggin [this message]
2016-08-22 10:47 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-08-26 3:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-08-26 6:21 ` Nicholas Mc Guire
2019-09-04 0:13 Stephen Rothwell
2019-09-04 1:00 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-09-04 6:22 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-09-04 12:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-09-04 12:32 ` Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160819204455.6351ffb8@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).