[llvm-dev] Linking Linux kernel with LLD
Sean Silva via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri Jan 20 13:23:16 PST 2017
One thing I remember is that Linux's build system does directly tamper with
object files with custom tools, so those tools might be unhappy with LLD's
binaries or just do the wrong thing (sometimes such tools have hardcoded
assumptions etc.). One specific case I remember is that linux's
copy_from_user/copy_to_user implementations use inline asm to build up a
table which is sorted by a custom tool (I think this modification happens
-- Sean Silva
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Dmitry Golovin via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi all!
> Recently there was a discussion on this mailing list about linking Linux
> and GRUB with LLD.
> I have actually tried to link Linux kernel with LLD and (with some
> modifications) it linked successfully (but didn't run well).
> Here is the list of modifications I had to do in order to link the kernel
> (I have used llvmlinux with clang and mainline with gcc, the results are
> 1. LLD patches:
> - D28094 (Implemented support for R_386_PC8/R_386_8 relocations)
> - D28857 (Allow relative relocations to a absolute value defined in
> linker script)
> - [not actually used] D28612 (Added support for --emit-relocs)
> 2. Kernel configuration. I tried "make tinyconfig" and then changed to
> CONFIG_64BIT=y with menuconfig. I wanted the minimal kernel configuration
> for x86_64. After I get it working, I will try defconfig.
> 3. In arch/x86/Makefile changed the M16_CFLAGS to just "-m16". I think
> that cc-option should test if compiler supports '-m16' option and if it
> does, use it, if it doesn't use '-m32 -Wa,./arch/x86/boot/code16gcc.h'
> instead. I don't know why, but this test failed for me and LLD didn't
> accept this header, so I just simply changed the flag to '-m16' because I
> didn't want to investigate why did the test failed. It's just a quick
> workaround, but it works.
> 3. In arch/x86/boot/Makefile and arch/x86/realmode/rm/Makefile added "-m
> elf_i386" to LDFLAGS_setup.elf and LDFLAGS_realmode.elf accordingly. The
> problem is that the linker is invoked as "ld.lld -m elf_x86_64" and it
> ignores the OUTPUT_FORMAT from linker scripts. Being invoked as "ld.lld -m
> elf_x86_64 -m elf_i386" doesn't break anything and LLD even produces the
> right format of the binaries. Again a quick workaround, but it works.
> 4. In arch/x86/realmode/rm/Makefile removed "--emit-relocs" from
> LDFLAGS_realmode.elf. This is the problem with D28612 — I applied the patch
> to support --emit-relocs option, but LLD segfaulted. Reported here:
> 5. In arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S commented out the "CONSTRUCTORS",
> because LLD doesn't support it.
> 6. In arch/x86/boot/setup.ld replaced 5*512 with precalculated value of
> 2560 because it doesn't seem that LLD supports math inside ASSERT in linker
> 7. In arch/x86/boot/setup.ld commented out the line ". = ASSERT(_end <=
> 0x8000, "Setup too big!");" because it seems to always fire this assertion,
> and the kernel is not going to be working anyway, so I just want it linked
> even if it will be unusable.
> 8. In arch/x86/lib/copy_user_64.S removed the line "bad_from_user:"
> (probably it was just a mistake), in arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S removed
> semicolon after "*(.apicdrivers)" (also probably just a mistake).
> Finally the kernel was built and it obviously didn't run (only printed out
> "No setup signature found..." but this is some result as well). Probably,
> the result could be better if the --emit-relocs option didn't fail and
> CONSTRUCTORS were supported. I really don't know what to do about the
> assertion that I have commented out.
> I also tried using tools provided by LLVM instead of binutils
> (HOSTCC=clang HOSTLD=ld.lld CC=clang LD=ld.lld AR=llvm-ar NM=llvm-nm), it
> seems to work with llvmlinux, but clang will not work with the mainline.
> Clang doesn't seem to use integrated assembler, so I had to write a simple
> wrapper script around llvm-mc to use instead GNU as. I also have few
> patches to make llvm-objcopy to work with latest LLVM and support needed
> subset of flags, will publish it soon.
> You can find my workarounds as a patch (the kernel will not work with this
> applied!) and my kernel config attached.
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev