[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFhGd8pasnTTv87V3LYpzCz=DdS8dXGA8Z9qGEqw=K+C_Xvf=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 15:01:56 -0700
From: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/9] x86/purgatory: Simplify stack handling
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 2:53 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:32:52PM +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 11:26:59AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 05:53:12PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > arch/x86/purgatory/stack.S | 18 ------------------
> > >
> > > This needs a small fix up to build.
> > >
> > > make[6]: *** No rule to make target 'arch/x86/purgatory/stack.o', needed by 'arch/x86/purgatory/purgatory.ro'.
> > >
> >
> > I was trying to reproduce this build failure, but to no avail. I am
> > curious what your build target / build command was.
> >
> > It is clear that stack.S has been removed so your change makes sense, I
> > don't doubt that -- I just cannot get that specific error message you
>
> Odd, I was using my distribution configuration for the test but it is
> easily reproducible with allmodconfig:
>
> $ make -skj"$(nproc)" ARCH=x86_64 LLVM=1 allmodconfig arch/x86/purgatory/
> make[6]: *** No rule to make target 'arch/x86/purgatory/stack.o', needed by 'arch/x86/purgatory/purgatory.ro'.
> ...
Agh, I was just doing a defconfig followed by a menuconfig to manually
enable all the kexec and purgatory stuff. I wonder which one I missed.
allyes/allmodconfig is what I needed here :thumbs_up:
>
> > encountered (what is a .ro file supposed to be, anyway?).
>
> Read only? Relocatable object? *shrug*
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists