linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] Allow CONFIG_PPC64_BIG_ENDIAN_ELF_ABI

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: <Y/OW6mRi3qDpVQkc@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 08:51:06 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     npiggin@...il.com, christophe.leroy@...roup.eu,
        erhard_f@...lbox.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com, trix@...hat.com,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev, patches@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Allow CONFIG_PPC64_BIG_ENDIAN_ELF_ABI_V2 with ld.lld
 15+

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 05:11:54PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> writes:
> > Currently, CONFIG_PPC64_BIG_ENDIAN_ELF_ABI_V2 is not selectable with
> > ld.lld because of an explicit dependency on GNU ld, due to lack of
> > testing with LLVM.
> >
> > Erhard was kind enough to test this option on his hardware with LLVM 15,
> > which ran without any issues. This should not be too surprising, as
> > ld.lld does not have support for the ELFv1 ABI, only ELFv2, so it should
> > have decent support. With this series, big endian kernels can be built
> > with LLVM=1.
> >
> > This has seen our basic set of powerpc configurations with clang-15,
> > clang-16, and clang-17 but I will never be opposed to more testing :)
> >
> > The first two patches fix a couple of issues I noticed while build
> > testing and the final patch actually allows the option to be selected.
> 
> Thanks for this.
> 
> I thought about applying this last week but decided not to. I'll plan to
> pick it up for 6.4.

No worries, I sent this much later in the development cycle than I had
initially intended, so I figured that 6.3 was a long shot anyways. Plus
more soak time is never a bad thing :)

Thanks for taking the initial look, cheers!
Nathan