From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51748) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RPyJE-00073z-U9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:18:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RPyJD-0008M3-PS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:18:56 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4980) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RPyJD-0008Lm-Ge for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:18:55 -0500 Message-ID: <4EC13159.6070209@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:18:49 +0200 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1321281701-4192-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <4EC12E82.9050605@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1.0] configure: build position independent executables across the board, by default List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Blue Swirl , Paul Moore , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 11/14/2011 05:15 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > > We're unlikely to see testing before we apply the patch, and for oddball > > archs, even afterwards. > > Yes, but if you put this change in just before release you > get much less testing than if you do it with several months > before release. This kind of change makes me nervous. > > > What we can do the qualify it on a build test > > (and assume that if it builds, it runs, which I think is a safe assumption). > > One of the failure cases I was thinking of is that if PIE means > the platform's loader puts things in a different bit of the > address space this might break TCG's assumptions about maximum > distances between the codegen buffer and host C code. (That's > a bug in TCG really but it would still be near-to-release > breakage.) Is this assumption tested at runtime? If so, we can have the failure message mumble something about building with --disable-pie. > But yes, a build test would be a good start. (My money's > on it failing to build on MacOSX.) I'll post a v3 with an additional test. > PS: what's the -DPIE needed for? Copied from cookbook. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function