linux-kernel - RE: Linux 2.6.38-rc1 doesn't boot

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ADDEBCD9C145E542A8688C29F1FBDCB9C86B5688@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:06:54 -0800
From:	"Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>
To:	"Lu, Hongjiu" <hongjiu.lu@...el.com>,
	"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@...el.com>
CC:	"'mingo@...e.hu'" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"'markus@...ppelsdorf.de'" <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
	"'torvalds@...ux-foundation.org'" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"'linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'sam@...nborg.org'" <sam@...nborg.org>
Subject: RE: Linux 2.6.38-rc1 doesn't boot

That is surprisingly painful, which is why the high frequency of binutils bugs is a major headache to us in the kernel world.  Either way the  current code is just hacky.

-- 
Sent with Good (www.good.com)


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lu, Hongjiu
Sent:	Friday, January 21, 2011 07:37 AM Pacific Standard Time
To:	Anvin, H Peter; Li, Shaohua
Cc:	Ingo Molnar; Markus Trippelsdorf; Linus Torvalds; Linux Kernel Mailing List; Sam Ravnborg
Subject:	RE: Linux 2.6.38-rc1 doesn't boot

Or we can just ban those broken linker versions.

H.J.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anvin, H Peter
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 7:29 AM
> To: Li, Shaohua
> Cc: Ingo Molnar; Markus Trippelsdorf; Lu, Hongjiu; Linus Torvalds;
> Linux Kernel Mailing List; Sam Ravnborg
> Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.38-rc1 doesn't boot
> 
> On 01/20/2011 11:18 PM, Li, Shaohua wrote:
> >  		*(.jiffies)
> >  	}
> >  	jiffies = VVIRT(.jiffies);
> > +	jiffies_64 = jiffies;
> >
> 
> OK, this is just messed up.  If we need jiffies in a special section
> then we should declare it as such (see __jiffy_data), but it's not
> clear
> to me why we would.  This seems like hack upon hack.
> 
> However, I suspect we may want to put jiffies into a .S file, and that
> .S file needs to take into account architectures which need underscore
> prefixes (which really sucks to have in ELF and is a major fail on
> those
> ABI designers...)
> 
> 	-hpa