Hi, > 2026年7月24日 05:40，Miao Wang <[email protected]> 写道： > > Hi, > >> 2026年7月24日 05:02，Salvatore Bonaccorso <[email protected]> 写道： >> >> Hi Miao, >> >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 06:58:29PM +0800, Miao Wang wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>>> 2026年7月23日 00:14，Miao Wang <[email protected]> 写道： >>>> >>>> Control: tags -1 - moreinfo >>>> >>>>> 2026年7月23日 00:10，Salvatore Bonaccorso <[email protected]> 写道： >>>>> >>>>> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 07:50:40AM +0800, Miao Wang wrote: >>>>>> Package: linux-modules-7.1.4+deb14-loong64 >>>>>> Version: 7.1.4-1 >>>>>> Severity: serious >>>>>> Control: block -1 by 1142570 >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear maintainer, >>>>>> >>>>>> The kernel modules in 7.1.4+deb14 for loong64 is unable to be loaded by >>>>>> the >>>>>> kernel. The error in dmesg is: >>>>>> >>>>>> kmod: xxxx: Unsupport relocation type 102, please add its support. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is because a bug introduced in binutils, which inserts unexpected >>>>>> relocation >>>>>> entries into ld -r outputs. This has been fixed by upstream. >>>>> >>>>> So this is an issue in binutils only or what change has been applied >>>>> to Linux? Is it applied in mainline and as well queued for 7.1.5? >>>> >>>> This is an issue in binutils only. No changes is needed to be done >>>> in Linux and nothing can be done in Linux to work around this. >>>> >>> >>> I saw you have reassigned the bug to binutils. I believe that although the >>> problem lies in binutils, the compiled binary packages are seriously >>> broken, preventing the system from booting. I wonder whether we should keep >>> a bug open for linux to prevent the problematic version from migrating >>> from unstable to testing according to the policy and convention. >> >> Yes I did so because the issue is not in src:linux. This would not >> prevent in fact src:linux to migrate (which is a pity in itself since >> we really want 7.1.4 to go to testing). But I talked to the release >> team and they added a block hint so linux won't migrate until the >> block lifted. >> >> Can you please respond here once binutils is fixed? >> > > Many thanks for your quick action. I have opened #1142570 to record this. > I have seen patches for this in upstream, but there seems to be some > confusion on this.
The bug in binutils has been fixed by doko in 2.47-1. Cheers, Miao Wang
