linux-kernel - Re: LTS kernel Linux 4.14.290 unable to boot with edk2-ovmf (x86

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: <a002f2a6-7c5f-c8f1-f331-7f1ca47132f9@gmx.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 19:59:14 +0800
From:   Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-x86_64@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: LTS kernel Linux 4.14.290 unable to boot with edk2-ovmf (x86_64
 UEFI runtime)



On 2022/8/22 19:53, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 07:07:19PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2022/8/22 16:30, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 04:19:49PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>>>> Regardless, if you need an older compiler, just use these ones:
>>>>>
>>>>>       https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/
>>>>>
>>>>> They go back to 4.9.4 for x86, you'll surely find the right one for your
>>>>> usage. I've long used 4.7.4 for kernels up to 4.9 and 6.5 for 4.19 and
>>>>> above, so something within that area will surely match your needs.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, it would be way more awesome if the page can provide some hint on
>>>> the initial release date of the compilers.
>>>>
>>>> It would help a lot of choose the toolchain then.
>>>
>>> It wouldn't help, if you look closely, you'll notice that in the "other
>>> releases" section you have the most recent version of each of them. That
>>> does not preclude the existence of the branch earlier. For example gcc-9
>>> was released in 2019 and 9.5 was emitted 3 years later. That's quite an
>>> amplitude that doesn't help.
>>
>> Maybe I'm totally wrong, but if GCC10.1 is released May 2020, and even
>> 10.4 is released 2022, then shouldn't we expect the kernel releases
>> around 2020 can be compiled for all GCC 10.x releases?
>>
>> Thus the initial release date should be a good enough hint for most cases.
>
> If you speak about initial release, yes that should generally be a valid
> assumption.
>
>> If go this method, for v4.14 I guess I should go gcc 7.x, as gcc 7.1 is
>> released May 2017, even the latest 7.5 is released 2019.
>
> Then it should definitely work. But I think you're spending way too much
> time comparing dates and discussing on the subject. By the time it took
> to check these dates, you could already have downloaded one such compiler
> and built a kernel to verify it did build correctly ;-)

That's completely true.

Except the fact that, even with time period correct tool chain (gcc
7.5), the compiled v4.14.x kernel (tried both 4.14.0 and latest
4.14.290), neither can boot nor cause any early boot message to pop up. :(

Anyway, thank you very much for the toolchain part, it would definitely
help for my future adventure related to stable kernels (looking at tons
of v4.12 related branches with sad face).

Thanks,
Qu

>
> Willy