[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+G9fYv_guwJLpk+8poPKsSw7NOxw9-AXuEDy=iceXimfStxfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2021 11:44:23 +0530
From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: kernel/kexec_file.o: failed: Cannot find symbol for section 10: .text.unlikely.
> > > > Is this a regression? Has this compiler ever been able to build this
> > > > arch like this?
> > >
> > > Yes. It is a regression with gcc-11.
> > >
> > > stable rc Linux 5.13.14 with gcc-11 - powerpc - FAILED
> > > stable rc Linux 5.13.14 with gcc-10 - powerpc - PASSED
> >
> > Ah, ok, and does 5.14 or newer work properly?
>
> No.
> stable rc Linux 5.14.1-rc1 with gcc-11 - powerpc - FAILED
> stable rc Linux 5.14.1-rc1 with gcc-10 - powerpc - PASS
>
>
> I will check Linux mainline and Linux next and get back to you.
Since we started building with gcc-11 last weekend and started
noticing these build failures on stable-rc, mainline and next.
and today's stable-rc review also failed with these combinations.
Linux next master with gcc-11 - powerpc-defconfig - FAILED
Linux mainline master with gcc-11 - powerpc-defconfig - FAILED
stable rc Linux 5.14.2-rc1 with gcc-11 - powerpc-defconfig - FAILED
stable rc Linux 5.13.15-rc1 with gcc-11 - powerpc-defconfig - FAILED
stable rc Linux 5.10.63-rc1 with gcc-11 - powerpc-defconfig - FAILED
FYI,
The following powerpc config build PASS with gcc-11
- allnoconfig
- mpc83xx_defconfig
- tqm8xx_defconfig
- maple_defconfig
- cell_defconfig
- ppc64e_defconfig
- ppc6xx_defconfig
- Naresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists