On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 3:24 PM Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 03/11, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 07:10:57PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > See the "older binutils?" above ;) > > > > > > my toolchain is quite old, > > > > > > $ ld -v > > > GNU ld version 2.25-17.fc23 > > > > > > but according to Documentation/process/changes.rst > > > > > > binutils 2.25 ld -v > > > > > > it should be still supported. > > > > So your issue happens because of older binutils? Any other ingredient? > > Yes, I think so. > > > I'd like for the commit message to contain *exactly* what we're fixing here so > > that anyone who reads this, can know whether this fix is needed on her/his > > kernel or not... > > OK. I'll update the subject/changelog to explain that this is only > needed for the older binutils and send V2. With it conditional on CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR, you can also drop PROVIDES(). Brian Gerst
