From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755058Ab1ATDcK (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jan 2011 22:32:10 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:1247 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754963Ab1ATDcJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jan 2011 22:32:09 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,347,1291622400"; d="scan'208";a="649043437" From: "Lu, Hongjiu" To: "Li, Shaohua" , Ingo Molnar CC: "Anvin, H Peter" , Markus Trippelsdorf , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Sam Ravnborg Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:32:05 -0800 Subject: RE: Linux 2.6.38-rc1 doesn't boot Thread-Topic: Linux 2.6.38-rc1 doesn't boot Thread-Index: Acu4RuIYFWDQG8F2QQOrWbth7x4UrwAC59fg Message-ID: <9DA5872FEF993D41B7173F58FCF6BE940570CEFA@orsmsx504.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <20110119073905.GA1652@gentoo.trippels.de> <20110119074902.GA1670@gentoo.trippels.de> <1295424766.1949.879.camel@sli10-conroe> <4D36A759.60704@intel.com> <20110119090904.GA4927@elte.hu> <1295489286.1949.882.camel@sli10-conroe> In-Reply-To: <1295489286.1949.882.camel@sli10-conroe> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by mail.home.local id p0K3WKGL003019 > > On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 17:09 +0800, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > > > On 01/19/2011 12:12 AM, Shaohua Li wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 15:49 +0800, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > >> On 2011.01.19 at 08:39 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > >>> On 2011.01.18 at 15:54 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> And as usual, report any regressions to the lists and the > appropriate > > > >>>> authorities. > > > >>> > > > >>> Unfortunately 2.6.38-rc1 doesn't even boot on my machine > (amd64). > > > >>> This is caused by 86b1e8dd83cbb0f: > > > >>> x86: Make relocatable kernel work with new binutils > > > >>> > > > >>> Reverting the commit solves the problem. > > > >> > > > >> I'm running the latest binutils: > > > >> GNU ld (Linux/GNU Binutils) 2.21.51.0.5.20110104 > > > > Hmm, reproduce it here with binutils-2.21.51.0.6-20110118 > > > > but not with GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.20.51- > system.20100908 > > > > I got this in system.map: ffffffff03514880 D jiffies_64, which > looks > > > > wrong. > > > > looks binutils changed something again. > > > > Have no idea, CC Lu Hongjiu. > > > > > > > > > > Either way... the whole jiffies vs jiffies_64 thing is kind of > > > ridiculous. We should be able to do it in a completely > > > architecture-generic way by either making it a union(!) (with > "jiffies" > > > and "jiffies_64" presumably would be #defines, or we do a global > replace > > > across the tree), moving the variable declaration itself to a .S > file > > > (which would only have data components and therefore would be > > > arch-generic) or doing something like the attached (untested since > it is > > > 1 am here) patch. > > > > > > This should let us get rid of the hacks in *all* the architectures, > not > > > just x86. > > > > Ok - until it's resolved i'll queue up a revert - a known build > failure is preferred > > to a boot regression. > it's not a build failure, without it, my i386 kernel can't boot > actually. Kernel build script should check known broken linkers and refuse to use it. H.J. {.n++%ݶw{.n+{G{ayʇڙ,jfhz_(階ݢj"mG?&~iOzv^m ?I