| Message ID | 2e0beb7e-022f-efb3-3adc-4877c60bfeba@suse.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | x86: work around build issue with GNU ld 2.37 | expand |
On 22/07/2021 10:20, Jan Beulich wrote: > I suspect it is commit 40726f16a8d7 ("ld script expression parsing") > which broke the hypervisor build, by no longer accepting section names > with a dash in them inside ADDR() (and perhaps other script directives > expecting just a section name, not an expression): .note.gnu.build-id > is such a section. Are binutils going to fix their testing to reduce the number of serious regressions they're releasing? > > Quoting all section names passed to ADDR() via DECL_SECTION() works > around the regression. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> I guess we've got no choice. Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ ENTRY(efi_start) > #else /* !EFI */ > > #define FORMAT "elf64-x86-64" > -#define DECL_SECTION(x) x : AT(ADDR(x) - __XEN_VIRT_START) > +#define DECL_SECTION(x) x : AT(ADDR(#x) - __XEN_VIRT_START) > > ENTRY(start_pa) > >
On 27.07.2021 14:33, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 22/07/2021 10:20, Jan Beulich wrote: >> I suspect it is commit 40726f16a8d7 ("ld script expression parsing") >> which broke the hypervisor build, by no longer accepting section names >> with a dash in them inside ADDR() (and perhaps other script directives >> expecting just a section name, not an expression): .note.gnu.build-id >> is such a section. > > Are binutils going to fix their testing to reduce the number of serious > regressions they're releasing? To be honest - I simply don't know. >> Quoting all section names passed to ADDR() via DECL_SECTION() works >> around the regression. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> > > I guess we've got no choice. Acked-by: Andrew Cooper > <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> Thanks. I see you've committed this already. Jan
On 03/08/2021 07:37, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 27.07.2021 14:33, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 22/07/2021 10:20, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> I suspect it is commit 40726f16a8d7 ("ld script expression parsing") >>> which broke the hypervisor build, by no longer accepting section names >>> with a dash in them inside ADDR() (and perhaps other script directives >>> expecting just a section name, not an expression): .note.gnu.build-id >>> is such a section. >> Are binutils going to fix their testing to reduce the number of serious >> regressions they're releasing? > To be honest - I simply don't know. > >>> Quoting all section names passed to ADDR() via DECL_SECTION() works >>> around the regression. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> >> I guess we've got no choice. Acked-by: Andrew Cooper >> <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> > Thanks. I see you've committed this already. Actually, it unilaterally breaks FreeBSD builds: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5417332467040256 I'm not sure why my build tests didn't notice, but obviously this patch isn't a workable option. ~Andrew
On 10.08.2021 10:33, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 03/08/2021 07:37, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 27.07.2021 14:33, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> On 22/07/2021 10:20, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> I suspect it is commit 40726f16a8d7 ("ld script expression parsing") >>>> which broke the hypervisor build, by no longer accepting section names >>>> with a dash in them inside ADDR() (and perhaps other script directives >>>> expecting just a section name, not an expression): .note.gnu.build-id >>>> is such a section. >>> Are binutils going to fix their testing to reduce the number of serious >>> regressions they're releasing? >> To be honest - I simply don't know. >> >>>> Quoting all section names passed to ADDR() via DECL_SECTION() works >>>> around the regression. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> >>> I guess we've got no choice. Acked-by: Andrew Cooper >>> <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> >> Thanks. I see you've committed this already. > > Actually, it unilaterally breaks FreeBSD builds: > https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5417332467040256 > > I'm not sure why my build tests didn't notice, but obviously this patch > isn't a workable option. I'm confused: Is the tool called "ld" there something that's not only not GNU ld, but not even compatible with GNU ld? (Iirc clang's linker is named differently. Or maybe that's just on Linux? In any event I've just checked with clang5 [on Linux], and the build worked fine there. But this looks to be using GNU ld irrespective of the compiler choice, and I also don't seem to have anything named "llvm-ld" on that system, despite there being a lot of other "llvm-*".) Jan
On 10.08.2021 10:50, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 10.08.2021 10:33, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 03/08/2021 07:37, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 27.07.2021 14:33, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>> On 22/07/2021 10:20, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> I suspect it is commit 40726f16a8d7 ("ld script expression parsing") >>>>> which broke the hypervisor build, by no longer accepting section names >>>>> with a dash in them inside ADDR() (and perhaps other script directives >>>>> expecting just a section name, not an expression): .note.gnu.build-id >>>>> is such a section. >>>> Are binutils going to fix their testing to reduce the number of serious >>>> regressions they're releasing? >>> To be honest - I simply don't know. >>> >>>>> Quoting all section names passed to ADDR() via DECL_SECTION() works >>>>> around the regression. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> >>>> I guess we've got no choice. Acked-by: Andrew Cooper >>>> <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> >>> Thanks. I see you've committed this already. >> >> Actually, it unilaterally breaks FreeBSD builds: >> https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5417332467040256 >> >> I'm not sure why my build tests didn't notice, but obviously this patch >> isn't a workable option. > > I'm confused: Is the tool called "ld" there something that's not only not > GNU ld, but not even compatible with GNU ld? (Iirc clang's linker is named > differently. Or maybe that's just on Linux? In any event I've just checked > with clang5 [on Linux], and the build worked fine there. But this looks to > be using GNU ld irrespective of the compiler choice, and I also don't seem > to have anything named "llvm-ld" on that system, despite there being a lot > of other "llvm-*".) So I've looked at their man pages. From version 11 to version 12 the linker changed from GNU ld to LLVM's. Interestingly the respective man page says ld.lld is a drop-in replacement for the GNU BFD and gold linkers. It ac- cepts most of the same command line arguments and linker scripts as GNU linkers. To me "most of the same" isn't quite enough to claim "drop-in replacement", but I guess that's just me ... Anyway - short of Roger being around to ask, I'll try to locate a means to tell the two apart from a linker script. Jan
--- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ ENTRY(efi_start) #else /* !EFI */ #define FORMAT "elf64-x86-64" -#define DECL_SECTION(x) x : AT(ADDR(x) - __XEN_VIRT_START) +#define DECL_SECTION(x) x : AT(ADDR(#x) - __XEN_VIRT_START) ENTRY(start_pa)
I suspect it is commit 40726f16a8d7 ("ld script expression parsing") which broke the hypervisor build, by no longer accepting section names with a dash in them inside ADDR() (and perhaps other script directives expecting just a section name, not an expression): .note.gnu.build-id is such a section. Quoting all section names passed to ADDR() via DECL_SECTION() works around the regression. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>