Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: CBL issue #431: lld: x86_64: sysfs: cannot create duplicate
 filename $module/.rodata.cst{16,32}
To:     sedat.dilek@gmail.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org
References: <CA+icZUVW2X6G=qukJTrZuUevcnrOiuShJGxnxVaqyONNxv+RYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <e5d3d2fc-874c-a8e3-1320-f9396a3621b5@redhat.com>
 <99dde862-6aee-65a0-8b39-33b8ac10df45@redhat.com>
 <CA+icZUUw3SgyCdk9fyv+mVUGDepDNGj8Bm7t0WWOE3Q0sHJs4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <863a33cf-0a1a-17af-0ea8-42e288f8a1fd@redhat.com>
 <CA+icZUVvtLkNNor+9wQy1_bt=NfRAfJD9f_daqX2Da=EcdjAaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5c5c169d-3bad-9e34-8c56-bedca3e5ae08@redhat.com>
 <CA+icZUUk8jhGqsu65A8oHFcqzrqNRon+riPff9aJu2UFLXL7wQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+icZUVy0-F7==ES2ar+0LumE3LTv8jye8LAz=DHAoDZKiyC5A@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <ceec77ac-28e5-5d2f-3ea9-ef132a35acc5@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 Apr 2019 17:04:37 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+icZUVy0-F7==ES2ar+0LumE3LTv8jye8LAz=DHAoDZKiyC5A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 4/8/19 4:57 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> We have arch/x86/crypto/chacha-avx2-x86_64.S and
> arch/x86/crypto/chacha-avx512vl-x86_64.S:
> 
> .rodata.cst32.CTR2BL
> .rodata.cst32.CTR4BL
> .rodata.cst32.CTR2BL
> .rodata.cst32.CTR4BL
> 
> ...and in arch/x86/crypto/sha256-avx2-asm.S and
> arch/x86/crypto/sha512-avx2-asm.S:
> 
> .rodata.cst32.PSHUFFLE_BYTE_FLIP_MASK
> 
> Correct?

You mean, we have duplicate section names.

Well, this brings me to my initial response -
"Not sure how exactly this causes the error".

Duplicate section names are allowed by the linker.
There is nothing wrong with that.

The warnings you see come from some other tooling,
which does not handle correctly object files with more
than one section with the same name.

(Having unique names is still preferable,
it helps humans to more easily find where sections come from,
and for potential future --gc-sections optimization).