linux-kernel - [BUG]x86: relocatable doesn't work with new binutils

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 17 Dec 2010 10:42:06 +0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Lu, Hongjiu" <hongjiu.lu@...el.com>,
	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Subject: [BUG]x86: relocatable doesn't work with new binutils

Hi,
The CONFIG_RELOCATABLE is broken with new binutils, which will make boot
panic. According to Lu Hongjiu, the affected binutils are from
2.20.51.0.12 to 2.21.51.0.3, which are release since Oct 22 this year.
At least ubuntu 10.10 is using such binutils. see:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12327
The reason of boot panic is we have 'jiffies = jiffies_64;' in
vmlinux.lds.S. The jiffies isn't in any section. In kernel build, there
is warning saying jiffies is an absolute address and can't be
relocatable. At runtime, jiffies will have virtual address 0.
We can easily workaround this issue by moving jiffies to a section or at
least warn people if such binutils are using. what should we do?

Thanks,
Shaohua

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/