From: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] Kbuild: avoid partial linking of drivers/built-in.o
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 16:13:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <551959F1.4030704@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu8-4XR5D-0_JnVfS2LNkH_Uvcc5txe4wJhwZogc5hZ-1w@mail.gmail.com>
On 2015-03-30 15:31, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 30 March 2015 at 15:26, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 02:38:35PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
>>> Is this a limitation of a particular ARM ABI or a limitation of a state
>>> of the art ARM linker or something else?
>>
>> It's a limitation of the ARM ISA.
>>
>> Normal PC-relative branches, which are emitted by the C compiler, can
>> branch +/- 32MB for ARM, or +/- 16MB of Thumb. Beyond that, the address
>> offset is not representable in the instruction.
Thank you both for the explanation!
>> The question is: how far do we go with allyesconfig... do we want it
>> to work, or is reaching the final link sufficient?
It certainly is more useful as a test tool if the baseline is a
successful compile and link. Because you can have genuine link errors
due to missing symbols.
>> If we do tweak
>> stuff to allow the link to work, are we going to try running it?
Good question. I myself always treated all{yes,mod}config as a build
test only and never dared to run it. Allyesconfig produces a giant
kernel image and allmodconfig builds binfmt_script as a module. And if
people used all*config for boot tests, they would probably be sending
patches to tweak the Kconfigs for that purpose. And this is not the case
as far as I can tell.
> That is an excellent question, hence the RFC in the subject line.
>
> Note that the other patch, the one against kallsyms, addresses the
> issue where the distance between the beginning of .text and the end of
> .init.text exceeds this limit, which is not as unlikely as the issue
> that this patch addresses, where just drivers/built-in.o in isolation
> already exceeds this limit.
>
> So I am quite happy to drop this, especially as we can add
> -ffunction-sections as well.
What you could do is to add a Kconfig option to arch/arm/Kconfig adding
-ffunction-sections to the compiler flags. Then allyesconfig would
select it and work around the problem in a somewhat elegant way.
Michal
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: mmarek@suse.cz (Michal Marek)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/2] Kbuild: avoid partial linking of drivers/built-in.o
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 16:13:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <551959F1.4030704@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu8-4XR5D-0_JnVfS2LNkH_Uvcc5txe4wJhwZogc5hZ-1w@mail.gmail.com>
On 2015-03-30 15:31, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 30 March 2015 at 15:26, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 02:38:35PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
>>> Is this a limitation of a particular ARM ABI or a limitation of a state
>>> of the art ARM linker or something else?
>>
>> It's a limitation of the ARM ISA.
>>
>> Normal PC-relative branches, which are emitted by the C compiler, can
>> branch +/- 32MB for ARM, or +/- 16MB of Thumb. Beyond that, the address
>> offset is not representable in the instruction.
Thank you both for the explanation!
>> The question is: how far do we go with allyesconfig... do we want it
>> to work, or is reaching the final link sufficient?
It certainly is more useful as a test tool if the baseline is a
successful compile and link. Because you can have genuine link errors
due to missing symbols.
>> If we do tweak
>> stuff to allow the link to work, are we going to try running it?
Good question. I myself always treated all{yes,mod}config as a build
test only and never dared to run it. Allyesconfig produces a giant
kernel image and allmodconfig builds binfmt_script as a module. And if
people used all*config for boot tests, they would probably be sending
patches to tweak the Kconfigs for that purpose. And this is not the case
as far as I can tell.
> That is an excellent question, hence the RFC in the subject line.
>
> Note that the other patch, the one against kallsyms, addresses the
> issue where the distance between the beginning of .text and the end of
> .init.text exceeds this limit, which is not as unlikely as the issue
> that this patch addresses, where just drivers/built-in.o in isolation
> already exceeds this limit.
>
> So I am quite happy to drop this, especially as we can add
> -ffunction-sections as well.
What you could do is to add a Kconfig option to arch/arm/Kconfig adding
-ffunction-sections to the compiler flags. Then allyesconfig would
select it and work around the problem in a somewhat elegant way.
Michal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-30 14:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-30 11:49 [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM large kernels Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 11:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 11:49 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] Kbuild: kallsyms: ignore veneers emitted by the ARM linker Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 11:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 12:11 ` Michal Marek
2015-03-30 12:11 ` Michal Marek
2015-03-30 11:49 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] Kbuild: avoid partial linking of drivers/built-in.o Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 11:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 12:38 ` Michal Marek
2015-03-30 12:38 ` Michal Marek
2015-03-30 12:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 12:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 13:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-30 13:26 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-30 13:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 13:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 14:13 ` Michal Marek [this message]
2015-03-30 14:13 ` Michal Marek
2015-03-30 17:04 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-30 17:04 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-03-31 15:22 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-03-31 15:22 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-03-31 16:27 ` Dave Martin
2015-03-31 16:27 ` Dave Martin
2015-03-31 16:34 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-31 16:34 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-31 18:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-03-31 18:46 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-03-31 18:42 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-03-31 18:42 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-04-01 9:04 ` Dave Martin
2015-04-01 9:04 ` Dave Martin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=551959F1.4030704@suse.cz \
--to=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.