From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <npiggin@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pg0-x241.google.com (mail-pg0-x241.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::241])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3tZ3L4201MzDw19
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Thu,  8 Dec 2016 16:08:44 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x241.google.com with SMTP id x23so25655865pgx.3
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 07 Dec 2016 21:08:44 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:07:51 +1000
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sachin Sant <sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
 <benh@kernel.crashing.org>, PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>, Ard
 Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>, Balbir Singh
 <bsingharora@gmail.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Linus
 <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Dec 7 (kallsyms failure)
Message-ID: <20161208150751.19125a3b@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20161208152935.325120da@canb.auug.org.au>
References: <20161207172432.184970d7@canb.auug.org.au>
 <13d83759-40d3-593b-b53f-f3e75fb05b7a@infradead.org>
 <20161208105607.68810cae@canb.auug.org.au>
 <90c66e73-f7c9-3d48-04b7-0985cce53382@infradead.org>
 <20161208152935.325120da@canb.auug.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:29:35 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 18:30:57 -0800 Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/07/16 15:56, Stephen Rothwell wrote:  
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:42:32 -0800 Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:    
> > >>
> > >> I started seeing this yesterday (2016-1206).
> > >> This is on x86_64.
> > >>
> > >> Anybody know about it?
> > >>
> > >> kallsyms failure: relative symbol value 0xffffffff81000000 out of range in relative mode    
> > > 
> > > I got a similar failure starting a few days ago on my powerpc
> > > allyesconfig build.  I was assuming that it was PowerPC specific, but
> > > noone has found a cause yet.
> > >     
> > 
> > It may just be an invalid randconfig.  I modified scripts/kallsyms.c and
> > I see this message:
> > kallsyms failure: relative symbol value 0xffffffff81000000 [symbol: Tstartup_64] out of range in relative mode
> > 
> > and it makes sense that startup_64 would (or could) be at 0xffffffff81000000...
> > especially since CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x1000000 and
> > (from Documentation/x86/x86_64/mm.txt)
> > ffffffff80000000 - ffffffff9fffffff (=512 MB)  kernel text mapping, from phys 0
> > 
> > 
> > Ard, what do you think about this?  
> 
> The similar failure I saw in the powerpc allyesconfig build
> 
> kallsyms failure: relative symbol value 0xc000000000000000 out of range in relative mode
> 
> was caused by commit
> 
>   8ab2ae655bfe ("default exported asm symbols to zero")
> 
> which has been reverted in Linus' tree today.
> 

Huh, so it seems like the explicit 0 symbols were being picked up as the
kallsyms relative base, putting the 0xc... symbols beyond reach.