On Mon, 8 Dec 2025 at 13:56, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 08.12.2025 14:39, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > > From: Frediano Ziglio <[email protected]> > > > > Older binutils versions do not handle correctly PE files. > > It looks like they could work if they don't produce debug information > > but they mess the PE file in other way like putting invalid > > flags in sections. > > For instance they set IMAGE_SCN_LNK_NRELOC_OVFL flag which should be > > set only if the number of relocations are more than 64K and not on > > executable (while xen.efi is an executable). > > Although some UEFI implementation do not check for these minor flags > > we should not allow building not working artifacts. > > The sentence is self-contradictory imo: When "some UEFI implementation > do not check", what "not working artifacts" are you talking about? >
I cannot see the contradiction, some work, some not. > > Also different tools will complain about the format (like > > objdump and strip). > > > > Signed-off-by: Frediano Ziglio <[email protected]> > > Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> > > As said in reply to v9 - I don't think we should be taking this step > unless we can prove the generated binaries to be entirely unusable. I prefer if the build produces 100% working instead of a russian roulette. > Which, again as said, contradicts my personal experience. > I never said they never work. But implementations keep progressing and there will be more of them improving their checks. For instance currently implementations with enhanced memory protection will cause early crashes. > Jan Frediano
