search for: r_386_8

...Dmitry, thanls for sharing. Few comments/questions below: >Here is the list of modifications I had to do in order to link the kernel (I have used llvmlinux with clang and mainline with gcc, the >results are similar): > >1. LLD patches: > - D28094 (Implemented support for R_386_PC8/R_386_8 relocations) Do you remember where it was used ? >5. In arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S commented out the "CONSTRUCTORS", because LLD doesn't support it. It is https://reviews.llvm.org/D28951. CONSTRUCTORS can be just removed, they do nothing for ELF. >6. In arch/x86/boot/setu...

>>> - D28094 (Implemented support for R_386_PC8/R_386_8 relocations) >> Do you remember where it was used ? > >setup.elf: > ld.lld -m elf_i386 -T arch/x86/boot/setup.ld arch/x86/boot/a20.o arch/x86/boot/bioscall.o arch/x86/boot/cmdline.o arch/x86/boot/copy.o arch/x86/boot/cpu.o >arch/x86/boot/cpuflags.o arch/x86/boot/cpucheck.o ar...

...;> >> >Here is the list of modifications I had to do in order to link the >> kernel (I have used llvmlinux with clang and mainline with gcc, the >> >results are similar): >> > >> >1. LLD patches: >> > - D28094 (Implemented support for R_386_PC8/R_386_8 relocations) >> >> Do you remember where it was used ? >> >> >5. In arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S commented out the "CONSTRUCTORS", >> because LLD doesn't support it. >> >> It is https://reviews.llvm.org/D28951. CONSTRUCTORS can be just rem...

This attempts to address http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18220 It also fixes a test which was requiring the *wrong* output. I'm relatively happy with this part, and it even solves most of the hard part of feature request for .code16 in bug 8684 — which was actually why I started prodding at this. But I could do with some help with the 16-bit signed relocation handling, which I've