[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiXK4cc8ikqN15vfi2+wsYJYh08qH8qzCpy+08Gh9whLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:19:17 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: build failure caused by RUNTIME_CONST()
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 15:10, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> $ ld -v
> GNU ld version 2.25-17.fc23
Yeah, we document that we support building with ld-2.25. And I went
and looked into the binutils-gdb repo, and it looks like this whole
automatic start/stop symbol thing was introduced in 2.29.
> I can try to polish my hack, but as I said I don't understand this magic,
> and I can only test the build on x86.
Your hack doesn't look horrific to me - or at least no more horrific
than lds files always look.
I ended up with a slightly different approach, only because I'm
(probably entirely in vain) hoping that we might aim to use this
"standard" format of start/stop symbols, so I introduced it as some
kind of simple "NAMED_SECTION()" macro instead.
So this patch seems to work for me, and looks somewhat reasonable (if
people actually start using this and want to use different alignments,
we might have to make that alignment an argument in the future, but
let's go for a really simple macro interface for now).
Does it build and work for you with your old linker too?
Linus
View attachment "0001-runtime-constants-deal-with-old-decrepit-linkers.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (2735 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists