linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] MIPS: VDSO: Use $(LD) instead of $(CC) to link VDSO

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

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.21.2004271712130.851719@eddie.linux-mips.org>
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 17:22:53 +0100 (BST)
From:   "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
cc:     Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Golovin <dima@...ovin.in>,
        Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] MIPS: VDSO: Use $(LD) instead of $(CC) to link
 VDSO

On Sun, 26 Apr 2020, Nathan Chancellor wrote:

> > this causes build errors for me when (cross) compiling a big endian target:
> > 
> > target is little endian
> > mips64-linux-gnu-ld: arch/mips/vdso/elf.o: endianness incompatible with that of the selected emulation
> > mips64-linux-gnu-ld: failed to merge target specific data of file arch/mips/vdso/elf.o
> 
> Thanks for the report. I will look into it tomorrow and hopefully have a
> v4 by then.

 Can you actually record in the change description what the difference in 
the relevant link command is, as shown where `V=1' has been used with 
`make' invocation?

 Actually running `diff -bu' on the whole `V=1' build log obtained without 
and with your proposed change applied and ensuring there are no unwanted 
changes elsewhere will be a good measure of the correctness of your patch. 
You may have to prepare to be patient and run with `-j1' to make sure any 
`make' parallelism does not interfere with the order of commands printed.

  Maciej