Message ID | 20170925134057.30492-1-wei.liu2@citrix.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
>>> On 25.09.17 at 15:40, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote: > --- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile > +++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ $(addsuffix .c,$(SIMD)) $(addsuffix -avx.c,$(filter sse%,$(SIMD))): > ln -sf simd.c $@ > > $(TARGET): x86_emulate.o test_x86_emulator.o > - $(HOSTCC) -o $@ $^ > + $(HOSTCC) $(HOSTCFLAGS) -o $@ $^ > > .PHONY: clean > clean: > @@ -98,7 +98,9 @@ asm: > > asm/%: asm ; > > -HOSTCFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_xeninclude) -I. > +HOSTCFLAGS-x86_64 := > +$(call cc-option-add,HOSTCFLAGS-x86_64,HOSTCC,-no-pie) > +HOSTCFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_xeninclude) -I. $(HOSTCFLAGS-$(XEN_COMPILE_ARCH)) Hmm, so other than one could imply from gcc doc we get away without using -fno-PIE at all, i.e. it's only an issue with how linking is being done? Wouldn't it be better then to pass both (as long as supported, if we really care about older compilers here)? Jan
diff --git a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile index fd13ab53b1..87064494d1 100644 --- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile +++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ $(addsuffix .c,$(SIMD)) $(addsuffix -avx.c,$(filter sse%,$(SIMD))): ln -sf simd.c $@ $(TARGET): x86_emulate.o test_x86_emulator.o - $(HOSTCC) -o $@ $^ + $(HOSTCC) $(HOSTCFLAGS) -o $@ $^ .PHONY: clean clean: @@ -98,7 +98,9 @@ asm: asm/%: asm ; -HOSTCFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_xeninclude) -I. +HOSTCFLAGS-x86_64 := +$(call cc-option-add,HOSTCFLAGS-x86_64,HOSTCC,-no-pie) +HOSTCFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_xeninclude) -I. $(HOSTCFLAGS-$(XEN_COMPILE_ARCH)) x86.h := asm/x86-vendors.h asm/x86-defns.h asm/msr-index.h x86_emulate.h := x86_emulate.h x86_emulate/x86_emulate.h $(x86.h)