[meta-intel] [PATCH 1/8] common/binutils-2.24.51.0.3: New recipe

[Alejandro Hernandez]

On 02/27/2017 12:23 PM, Wold, Saul wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-02-27 at 10:11 -0800, Cal Sullivan wrote:
>> This one really scares me. Old version, removed CVE fixes, and might
>> cause compatibility issues with other layers...
>>
>> Saul?
>>
> I thought that Alejandro was going to have another series that removed
> the binutils?
>
> Alejandro?
>
> There was a presentation that talked about the LTO work at ELC, but
> it's still getting pushed.
>
> Sau!

Yeah we need to have a talk about this since were dropping 4.4, and last 
week I went throught some of the code of 4.9 which seems incompatible 
for LTO, I haven't sent the other series because we still haven't agreed 
on how to (more like where or when) to set WKS_FILE correctly, and the 
CONSOLE issue as well.


Alejandro


>
>> Thanks,
>> Cal
>>
>> On 02/13/2017 01:52 PM, Alejandro Hernandez wrote:
>>> This is severely hacked version of the fido binutils recipe, which
>>> is
>>> the latest binutils 2.24 recipe that we have to start with.
>>>
>>> Instead of using the standard gnu binutils, however, for kernel
>>> LTO,
>>> (which is the only reason we need this), we need to use the 'Linux
>>> binutils', which is a different tarball/branch.
>>>
>>> The problem is that there are various fixes needed for this version
>>> of
>>> binutils to work with gcc 6.2, and many of the patches in 2.24,
>>> such
>>> as the CVE patches, don't apply at build-time and so have been
>>> commented out.
>>>
>>> We should really be using the normal standard 2.7 binutils (using
>>> of
>>> course the linux binutils branch) but that currently produces
>>> internal
>>> errors during the kernel build.
>>>
>>> For now, this works, and allows us to produce a working LTO-enabled
>>> kernel.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi at linux.intel.com>
>>