* [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check
@ 2023-05-12 23:01 Sam Edwards
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] makefile: Consider "no relocs" to be "no unexpected relocs" Sam Edwards
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sam Edwards @ 2023-05-12 23:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot; +Cc: Tom Rini, Sam Edwards
The start-of-image marker symbol is `__image_copy_start`; by
searching for `_image_copy_start` instead, this check can
accidentally match `_image_copy_start_ofs`.
Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com>
---
Makefile | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index fb02bba08f..22bdc30109 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -1262,7 +1262,7 @@ OBJCOPYFLAGS_u-boot-nodtb.bin := -O binary \
binary_size_check: u-boot-nodtb.bin FORCE
@file_size=$(shell wc -c u-boot-nodtb.bin | awk '{print $$1}') ; \
map_size=$(shell cat u-boot.map | \
- awk '/_image_copy_start/ {start = $$1} /_image_binary_end/ {end = $$1} END {if (start != "" && end != "") print "ibase=16; " toupper(end) " - " toupper(start)}' \
+ awk '/__image_copy_start/ {start = $$1} /_image_binary_end/ {end = $$1} END {if (start != "" && end != "") print "ibase=16; " toupper(end) " - " toupper(start)}' \
| sed 's/0X//g' \
| bc); \
if [ "" != "$$map_size" ]; then \
--
2.39.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [PATCH 2/3] makefile: Consider "no relocs" to be "no unexpected relocs"
2023-05-12 23:01 [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check Sam Edwards
@ 2023-05-12 23:01 ` Sam Edwards
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] clang: Link with --no-pie instead of --apply-dynamic-relocs Sam Edwards
2023-05-14 15:28 ` [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check Tom Rini
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sam Edwards @ 2023-05-12 23:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot; +Cc: Tom Rini, Sam Edwards
Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com>
---
Makefile | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 22bdc30109..20785860f7 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -2109,7 +2109,8 @@ System.map: u-boot
checkarmreloc: u-boot
@RELOC="`$(CROSS_COMPILE)readelf -r -W $< | cut -d ' ' -f 4 | \
grep R_A | sort -u`"; \
- if test "$$RELOC" != "R_ARM_RELATIVE" -a \
+ if test -n "$$RELOC" -a \
+ "$$RELOC" != "R_ARM_RELATIVE" -a \
"$$RELOC" != "R_AARCH64_RELATIVE"; then \
echo "$< contains unexpected relocations: $$RELOC"; \
false; \
--
2.39.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] clang: Link with --no-pie instead of --apply-dynamic-relocs
2023-05-12 23:01 [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check Sam Edwards
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] makefile: Consider "no relocs" to be "no unexpected relocs" Sam Edwards
@ 2023-05-12 23:01 ` Sam Edwards
2023-05-14 15:28 ` Tom Rini
2023-05-14 15:28 ` [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check Tom Rini
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sam Edwards @ 2023-05-12 23:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot; +Cc: Tom Rini, Sam Edwards
The goal of using --apply-dynamic-relocs seems to be to have all
relocations applied "statically" to the output binary, so that
the dynamic segment can be dropped safely. However, LLD still
creates sections to support the dynamic section, and platform
linker scripts may not know to discard these.
Since the build process does not appear to make use of the dynamic
segment at all, it would be more sensible to suppress it entirely.
Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com>
---
Makefile | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 20785860f7..d71127e412 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -1024,7 +1024,7 @@ LDFLAGS_u-boot += $(LDFLAGS_FINAL)
LDFLAGS_u-boot += $(call ld-option, --no-dynamic-linker)
# ld.lld support
-LDFLAGS_u-boot += -z notext $(call ld-option,--apply-dynamic-relocs)
+LDFLAGS_u-boot += -z notext $(call ld-option,--no-pie)
LDFLAGS_u-boot += --build-id=none
--
2.39.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] clang: Link with --no-pie instead of --apply-dynamic-relocs
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] clang: Link with --no-pie instead of --apply-dynamic-relocs Sam Edwards
@ 2023-05-14 15:28 ` Tom Rini
2023-05-16 2:08 ` Sam Edwards
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2023-05-14 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sam Edwards; +Cc: u-boot
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1346 bytes --]
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 05:01:35PM -0600, Sam Edwards wrote:
> The goal of using --apply-dynamic-relocs seems to be to have all
> relocations applied "statically" to the output binary, so that
> the dynamic segment can be dropped safely. However, LLD still
> creates sections to support the dynamic section, and platform
> linker scripts may not know to discard these.
>
> Since the build process does not appear to make use of the dynamic
> segment at all, it would be more sensible to suppress it entirely.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com>
> ---
> Makefile | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index 20785860f7..d71127e412 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -1024,7 +1024,7 @@ LDFLAGS_u-boot += $(LDFLAGS_FINAL)
> LDFLAGS_u-boot += $(call ld-option, --no-dynamic-linker)
>
> # ld.lld support
> -LDFLAGS_u-boot += -z notext $(call ld-option,--apply-dynamic-relocs)
> +LDFLAGS_u-boot += -z notext $(call ld-option,--no-pie)
>
> LDFLAGS_u-boot += --build-id=none
>
How extensively have you tested this change? We don't install ld.lld in
our container environment right now (but should..) and from some local
testing I forget if we need to pass further make logic in to have ld.lld
be used instead.
--
Tom
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 659 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] clang: Link with --no-pie instead of --apply-dynamic-relocs
2023-05-14 15:28 ` Tom Rini
@ 2023-05-16 2:08 ` Sam Edwards
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sam Edwards @ 2023-05-16 2:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: u-boot
On 5/14/23 09:28, Tom Rini wrote:
Hi Tom!
> How extensively have you tested this change?
I tested it in building for the arm/sunxi target. U-Boot does not build
at all (on Clang+LLD) in its current state:
ld.lld: error: section type mismatch for .gnu.version_r
>>> <internal>:(.gnu.version_r): SHT_GNU_verneed
>>> output section .gnu: SHT_GNU_versym
However, I don't think I've reasoned correctly that --no-pie is the
correct flag to pass, since I do see in arch/arm/config.mk:
# needed for relocation
LDFLAGS_u-boot += -pie
...and by passing --no-pie, I am just turning that right back off,
getting a non-relocatable binary. So I should (and do) withdraw this
patch, and will work to understand the situation better before retrying.
It does seem that the present rule in the ARM target is to make a binary
that assumes a .text base but includes some .rel.dyn relocations to make
it optionally relocatable, so whatever flag we pass to LLD should
preserve that behavior without bringing in unwanted sections (versym
sections, .dynsym, .dynstr, ...)
> We don't install ld.lld in
> our container environment right now (but should..) and from some local
> testing I forget if we need to pass further make logic in to have ld.lld
> be used instead.
To support both LTO and non-LTO cases, I pass:
LTO_FINAL_LDFLAGS=-fuse-ld=lld LD=ld.lld
Cheers,
Sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check
2023-05-12 23:01 [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check Sam Edwards
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] makefile: Consider "no relocs" to be "no unexpected relocs" Sam Edwards
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] clang: Link with --no-pie instead of --apply-dynamic-relocs Sam Edwards
@ 2023-05-14 15:28 ` Tom Rini
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2023-05-14 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sam Edwards; +Cc: u-boot
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 349 bytes --]
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 05:01:33PM -0600, Sam Edwards wrote:
> The start-of-image marker symbol is `__image_copy_start`; by
> searching for `_image_copy_start` instead, this check can
> accidentally match `_image_copy_start_ofs`.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
--
Tom
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 659 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-05-16 11:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-05-12 23:01 [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check Sam Edwards
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] makefile: Consider "no relocs" to be "no unexpected relocs" Sam Edwards
2023-05-12 23:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] clang: Link with --no-pie instead of --apply-dynamic-relocs Sam Edwards
2023-05-14 15:28 ` Tom Rini
2023-05-16 2:08 ` Sam Edwards
2023-05-14 15:28 ` [PATCH 1/3] makefile: Fix symbol typo in binary_size_check Tom Rini
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox