Fw: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ld: shared library and PIE support for riscv*-elf and loongarch*-elf

[Xi Ruoyao]

On Fri, 2026-09-04 at 17:34 +0000, mintsuki wrote:
> > No. This is useful for other things than PE executables.
> > 
> > The LLM wrote that and I didn't bother to correct it because the
> > patches stand on their own merit.

IMO you should fix it (or simply delete it if you really don't care it).
Sending LLM output to reviewers w/o reviewing it first just adds extra
burdens to them.

> > Someone wanting to use a riscv64-elf or loongarch64-elf toolchain
> > to make a PIE kernel/freestanding application (ELF) (that the
> > Limine bootloader can load just fine) will encounter this error,
> > and, as far as I can tell, there isn't a good reason not to let
> > these freestanding toolchains for these architectures generate
> > PIEs/shared.

The kernel should be a static PIE instead of shared object.  The current
RISC-V Linux relocatable kernel is linked with -shared but IMO it's
wrong.

I pointed this out when I reviewed the patch adding relocatable support
to LoongArch Linux kernel (the first draft used -shared) and then the
patch was revised to use -static -pie --no-dynamic-linker instead (the
same combination that gcc -static-pie passes to ld).

Thus IMO having -pie for embedded to support gcc -static-pie makes sense
in general (some years ago I already wanted this when I had to refactor
a bare-metal ARM firmware for the ability being loaded by a first-stage
bootloader).  I'm unsure about -shared but maybe it should be allowed
too (conceptually I'd consider Linux kernel modules some "non-SVR4"
shared objects instead of relocatable objects, and the current approach
treating them as relocatable objects prevents things like linker
relaxation and LTO).

-- 
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>