Attachment is a testsuit. It costed me a week to make this testsuit. If I added -mno-explicit-relocs -mno-split-addresses to makefile, this bug disappeared. Is there any performance difference with and without these flags ? Thanks! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <wyb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: <macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <sskowron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <rsandifo@xxxxxxxxxx>; <linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 11:44 AM Subject: Re: unmatched R_MIPS_HI16/LO16 on gcc 3.4.3 > On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 10:49:56AM +0800, wyb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > I met similar problem as Stanislaw Skowronek, but for gcc 3.4.3. I created a > > kernel module, when insmod, kernel reported "dangerous relocation". I traced > > the bug, found unmatched R_MIPS_HI16/LO16 in module's elf file, and kernel > > refused to relocate: > > ... > > 00015a5c 00039a05 R_MIPS_HI16 0000000c tos_net_debug > > 00015a68 00000204 R_MIPS_26 00000000 .text > > 00015a64 00046005 R_MIPS_HI16 0006b598 arp_proxy_list > > 00015a6c 00046006 R_MIPS_LO16 0006b598 arp_proxy_list > > ... > > > > My problem arised when expression on tos_net_debug could be optimized out, > > it seemed like gcc optimized out the LO16, but left HI16. > > > > The original discussion on similar problem is at > > http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2005-05/msg00097.html > > Do you have a testcase, a kernel .config file to trigger this? > > Ralf >
Attachment:
bug.tgz
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
.config
Description: Binary data
