linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] m68k: Enable dead code elimination

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAFr9PXnhSrF=H1kq-1AKej=zMoR73+5pLrzBLgu8HrfgDOGqBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 07:41:41 +0900
From: Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org>, Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>, 
	linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] m68k: Enable dead code elimination

Hi Geert and Finn,

On Sun, 8 Jun 2025 at 18:36, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Finn,
>
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2025 at 10:32, Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Apr 2025, Greg Ungerer wrote:
> > > On 29/4/25 10:04, Daniel Palmer wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 at 08:37, Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > >> I notice that some other architectures (arm and powerpc) have version
> > > >> checks on gcc or ld in the config. Do you know if there is any
> > > >> version limitations for m68k here?
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure about that. I'll try to work out why they have the checks
> > > > and see if that affects m68k too. I'm using GCC13 so probably new
> > > > enough that most things work.
> > >
> > > FWIW, the oldest toolchain I had lying around was based on gcc 8.3.0 and
> > > binutils 2.32. This patch worked fine on that.
> > >
> >
> > I was going to try the patch with gcc-6.4.0 but apparently that's too old
> > to build stock linux-6.15 (see below). Documentation/admin-guide/README.rst
> > says I should have "at least gcc 5.1".
>
> Someone forgot to update that file...
> Anyway, it has just been increased again for v6.16-rc1 by Arnd in
> commit 118c40b7b50340bf ("kbuild: require gcc-8 and binutils-2.30").

I sort of lost track of this[0].. anyhow I looked at the other archs
that have HAVE_LD_DEAD_CODE_DATA_ELIMINATION they all have different
constraints.
I think we should add them if/when someone finds a toolchain that
fails to build. I don't want to add some constraint for an issue that
only happens on arm by mistake.

Cheers,

Daniel

0 - trying to get the Amiga m68k bootloader to build without a hacked
up amigaos gcc :)