Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754196AbdFWDe3 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 22 Jun 2017 23:34:29 -0400
Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:33562 "EHLO
        mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753925AbdFWDe1 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 22 Jun 2017 23:34:27 -0400
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 13:34:11 +1000
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yamada.masahiro@socionext.com,
        amodra@gmail.com
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of most trees
Message-ID: <20170623133411.64199627@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170622.105648.1780325804771154563.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20170622184116.0ebaabd9@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
        <20170622.101306.2121302610489503804.davem@davemloft.net>
        <20170623003339.11cbc062@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
        <20170622.105648.1780325804771154563.davem@davemloft.net>
Organization: IBM
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1551
Lines: 44

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:56:48 -0400 (EDT)
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:

> From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:33:39 +1000
> 
> > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:13:06 -0400 (EDT)
> > David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> >   
> >> From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> >> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:41:16 +1000
> >>   
> >> > Is there any way for the linker to place the inputs to avoid unresolvable
> >> > relocations where possible?    
> >> 
> >> I don't think so.
> >>   
> >> > A way to work around this is to make arch/sparc/lib/hweight.o an obj-y
> >> > rather than lib-y. That's a hack because it just serves to move the
> >> > input location, but not really any more of a hack than the current code
> >> > that also only works because of input locations...    
> >> 
> >> I could adjust those branches in the sparc code into indirect calls
> >> but it's going to perform a bit poorly on older cpus.  
> > 
> > The build succeeds with your patch. That should solve it properly
> > so it won't come back to bite again.
> > 
> > If you can tolerate the slowdown on old CPUs I'd be grateful if
> > we could merge it for linux-next to get this thin archives tree
> > unblocked.  
> 
> Feel free to merge it into your series:
> 
> ====================
> sparc64: Use indirect calls in hamming weight stubs.
> 
> Otherwise, depending upon link order, the branch relocation
> limits could be exceeded.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>


Thanks for the patch, looks good to me.