Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-441-ga3ab13cd6d-fm-20230517.001-ga3ab13cd
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <65124759-26de-4111-bc54-545a00620d75@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <mhng-e172207d-d67d-46ab-ab95-85f0a854ace2@palmer-ri-x1c9a>
References: <mhng-e172207d-d67d-46ab-ab95-85f0a854ace2@palmer-ri-x1c9a>
Date:   Wed, 24 May 2023 08:23:41 +0200
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To:     "Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        "Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Cc:     "Alexandre Ghiti" <alex@ghiti.fr>,
        "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        linux-next <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        "Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, "Conor Dooley" <conor@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for May 15 (several RV64 build errors)
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 24, 2023, at 03:29, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2023 17:22:20 PDT (-0700), rdunlap@infradead.org wrote:
>> On 5/23/23 06:07, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2023 04:28, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>> On 5/19/23 03:42, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
>>>>>>> /opt/crosstool/gcc-12.2.0-nolibc/riscv64-linux/bin/riscv64-linux-ld: section .data LMA [000000000041a000,00000000075bffd7] overlaps section .text LMA [00000000000f09d4,00000000033562ab]
>>>>>>> /opt/crosstool/gcc-12.2.0-nolibc/riscv64-linux/bin/riscv64-linux-ld: section .init.pi.text LMA [00000000033562ac,0000000003359137] overlaps section .data LMA [000000000041a000,00000000075bffd7]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll check this one too which seems to be related to kernel/pi introduction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to Bjorn: this is caused by XIP_KERNEL, which is known to have limited size, hence the overlap, so no fix for this one. Is there a way to exclude this config from randconfig?
>>>> Does this mean exclude XIP_KERNEL or something else from randconfigs?
>>>
>>>
>>> I meant excluding XIP_KERNEL from randconfigs: it has very strict constraints regarding what can/can't be enabled then it needs human intervention to make sure the error above does not happen. So I would not bother testing this in randconfigs if possible.
>>
>> I can exclude it from my randconfig builds, but I don't know of a way to exclude it from randconfig builds in general (i.e., for everyone).
>
> Arnd had suggested a trick related to menus that would result in 
> randconfig never enabling some config.  It'd suggested for 
> CONFIG_NONPORTABLE, but we didn't use it because it'd reduce randconfig 
> coverage.
>
> Maybe we should add a CONFIG_VERYSPECIAL of some sort and hide things 
> like XIP behind it (maybe M-mode too)?

I usually add 'depends on !COMPILE_TEST', that excludes it from most
build bots.

    Arnd