Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2020-06-23
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> ---
Hi Jason,

  Thanks for the test case.  There was a small problem with it, in that
  it deletes all of the temporary files at the end, including the newly
  built wireguard.ko, which makes it hard to investigate.

  Anyway I was able to capture the wireguard.ko file and I checked -
  the R_ARM_THM_JUMP11 reloc is certainly there, but it is also valid.
  The relocation can be processed to produce a valid branch instruction.

> The kernel module loader then sees R_ARM_THM_JUMP11 and refuses to load it,
> because it doesn't do JUMP11 relocations.

  This sounds to me like a kernel bug.  Why does it not support the
  R_ARM_THM_JUMP11 relocation ?  It supports other relocations, right ?

  I am inclined to consider this as not being a bug.  Given that you 
  have a workaround, and, to my mind, the real culprit is the kernel.
  Nevertheless I can appreciate that fixing the kernel might be 
  difficult, so I can see the appeal of an assembler based solution.

  As it happens the assembler already has some special case code to
  cover other relocations not supported by the kernel, so adding one
  more should not hurt.  Thus I am uploading a patch for you to test.
  Please could you try it out and let me know if it works ?


You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Reply via email to