Hi Vishal, On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 12:57:00PM +0530, Vishal Chourasia wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 08:46:48AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > +CLANG ppl > > > > Hi, > > > > Le 13/10/2025 à 06:01, Vishal Chourasia a écrit : > > > While debugging a ppc64le QEMU guest on an x86_64 host, I observed GDB > > > crashes > > > when attempting to attach to the remote target: > > > > > > (gdb) target remote :1234 > > > > > > Investigation revealed that cross-compiling the Linux kernel for ppc64le > > > on an > > > x86_64 host using Clang produces a vmlinux binary containing an empty > > > .interp > > > section. This empty .interp section is responsible for the GDB crashes. > > > > Which version of CLANG is it ? > (i) ❯ clang --version > clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git > a80bccc6847be104948f46d313f03ac6b9ccb292) > > > > > > > > > This issue does not occur when: > > > - Building for ppc64le target using GCC on x86_64 host > > > - Building for ppc64le target using Clang on ppc64le host > > > > Is it the same CLANG version ? > # clang --version > clang version 22.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git > 2f755c543ab357bd83235592fcee37fa391cdd9d) > > > > > > - Building for ppc64le target using GCC on ppc64le host > > > > > > For details refer [1] > > > > > > [1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33481
In this bug report, you mention using LLVM=1. Does the issue happen if you use GNU ld (ld.bfd) via LD (i.e., LD=powerpc64le-linux-gnu-ld or equivalent) over ld.lld from LLVM=1? This sounds more likely to be a linker difference rather than a compiler difference. Cheers, Nathan
