From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759385AbXGWGH7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 02:07:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754182AbXGWGHw (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 02:07:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:53932 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753854AbXGWGHv (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 02:07:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 02:07:46 -0400 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Andi Kleen Cc: Andre Noll , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1 Message-ID: <20070723060746.GO2063@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <200707230022.11831.ak@suse.de> <20070722232338.GI30660@skl-net.de> <200707230131.00302.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200707230131.00302.ak@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 01:31:00AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Monday 23 July 2007 01:23:38 Andre Noll wrote: > > On 00:22, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > /usr/bin/ld: section .text [ffffffffff700500 -> ffffffffff7007e3] overlaps section .gnu.version_d [ffffffffff7004d8 -> ffffffffff70050f] > > > > > > Does this patch fix it? > > > > Nope, with 0x600 I still get the same error. But it helped to further > > increase VDSO_TEXT_OFFSET to 0xc00. I tried 0x700, 0x800,... and 0xc00 > > is the smallest value in this series that makes the error go away, i.e. > > the patch below works for me. > > Can you send (privately) readelf -a output from your vdso.so ? > Your linker must be doing something weird. > > 0xc00 is quite wasteful. I think Roland's --build-id doesn't create very big section, the likely culprit would be a hacked up ld that e.g. defaults to --hash-style=both. Can you retry with --hash-style=sysv? vdso really has to include the traditional .hash section, otherwise it wouldn't be compatible with old glibcs, and an additional .gnu.hash might be an overkill for it - doesn't the vdso define only very few symbols? Jakub