From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C7F1C433FE for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:46:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=5lU2ePT9YYX7R6LCHXUfkQBMZqZ91G+I1FNEEs4RBns=; b=itqfoFJX0tK84e 7D9p5+XuSbwYuAYz9BHX4GdtIDk3U2OZHCXjT+yT2nX63EovoKyhoRSnfVtbu6U3fZxRuzFe2q4/J 9GQ1FZkba4DVaKgitrE5VJr/vP3e4cl8UWccCcJN8QQ49J5T1rvRIh+ToFDTm6n4Vdy1+up3uKHYY ffcQiW+Od9MBHy/Xpd9QLBfjTTzZqk3l/aoYpvaIhO2SowFxxYq5AIQ9YG1ExMqCEWld8A2jaaZUg Y1k5mFAhstO0zGu5TlioFQ6iUbi6Tf+vawFb1VaV/mRUWU4bsOKlr7+BLUIb2jP2RX/D6rZuHb1Jk u2x8SRUGFmRmMf9CXAOQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ncpry-0003Af-1I; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 14:45:50 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ncpru-00039u-Rh for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 14:45:48 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4909113E; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 07:45:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lakrids (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0BD773F73B; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 07:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 15:45:42 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: Will Deacon Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, keescook@chromium.org, ardb@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org Subject: Re: allmodconfig builds failing to link on arm64 Message-ID: References: <20220408115407.GA27685@willie-the-truck> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220408115407.GA27685@willie-the-truck> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220408_074546_975954_B65E8E3D X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.36 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 12:54:07PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi folks, Hi Will, > Since -rc1 (although I haven't tried bisecting the merge window), I'm > not able to link allmodconfig for arm64: > > aarch64-linux-gnu-ld: .init.data has both ordered [`__patchable_function_entries' in init/main.o] and unordered [`.init_array.1' in virt/lib/irqbypass.o] sections > aarch64-linux-gnu-ld: final link failed: bad value > make: *** [Makefile:1158: vmlinux] Error 1 > > I'm using an Android clang based on 12.0.6 and LD claims to be > 2.33.1.20191209. I can reproduce that when using the llvm.org 12.0.0 binaries along with the kernel.org crosstool 9.2.0 binaries (binutils 2.32) to build v5.18-rc1 allmodconfig. I see the failure with (at least) the following combinations that I tested: * LLVM 11.0.0 && binutils 2.34 (kernel.org 8.4.0 binaries) * LLVM 12.0.0 && binutils 2.30 (kernel.org 8.1.0 binaries) * LLVM 12.0.0 && binutils 2.32 (kernel.org 9.2.0 binaries) * LLVM 12.0.0 && binutils 2.34 (kernel.org 8.4.0/9.3.0 binaries) * LLVM 13.0.0 && binutils 2.34 (kernel.org 8.4.0 binaries) * LLVM 14.0.0 && binutils 2.34 (kernel.org 8.4.0 binaries) I *DO NOT* see the failure with the following combinations: * LLVM 12.0.0 && binutils 2.36.1 (kernel.org 10.3.0/11.1.0 binaries) * LLVM 13.0.0 && binutils 2.36.1 (kernel.org 10.3.0/11.1.0 binaries) * LLVM 14.0.0 && binutils 2.36.1 (kernel.org 10.3.0/11.1.0 binaries) So clearly something changed on the binutils side between 2.34 and 2.36.1, but I don't know whether either behaviour is incorrect, or whether LLVM implicitly depends upon a newer binutils version. I don't know why this suddenly became a problem in v5.18-rc1; I'll have a look. Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel