Re: git: da3096a92d2c - main - rdrand_rng: Build with -fPIC on i386 when using GCC.
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2023 21:19:15 UTC
On 7/1/23 12:43 PM, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 1 Jul 2023, at 20:23, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> >> The branch main has been updated by jhb: >> >> URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=da3096a92d2c1c06b25613444d9b369475d50321 >> >> commit da3096a92d2c1c06b25613444d9b369475d50321 >> Author: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> >> AuthorDate: 2023-07-01 19:23:00 +0000 >> Commit: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> >> CommitDate: 2023-07-01 19:23:00 +0000 >> >> rdrand_rng: Build with -fPIC on i386 when using GCC. >> >> ld.bfd requires an R_386_PLT32 relocation for calls to ifuncs >> rather than R_386_PC32. (lld permits R_386_PC32.) > > That’s odd and doesn’t quite seem a sufficient explanation on its own? > PDEs can have IFUNCs just fine today, so why is it different for kernel > modules here? I don't know. I sort of assumed this was related to the fact that we have custom weirdness for how ifuncs work with amd64 kernel modules (though I guess that shouldn't matter for i386 since I think that's due to amd64 not using DSOs for modules?). What I do know is that ld.bfd failed to link and said it wanted -fPIC. It's also been a while since I first wrote this commit and log message and I don't recall the details of how I had come to that conclusion. Searching now I did come across this bug report for binutils which might suggest that this might actually be a difference in the assembler behavior: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169 -- John Baldwin