On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 11:30:12AM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > I failed to match the actual change with the commit message. Consider > that ignorance on my side.
FYI, I'm using the master branch of the upstream, but yes it's in the 'rust-next' or other branches as well, so maybe not a big deal IMO. Of what 'https://rust-for-linux.com/branches' says, maybe I'll use the 'rust-next' branch for the next time, thanks for pointing out! > I see a problem in just renaming a variable, might be my problem. Thing > is that removal of 'KBUILD_RUSTFLAG += ' feels wrong, hence this posting. I think this is fine, the 'KBUILD_RUSTFLAG' controls the 'PIE' flag for both the kernel itself and the loadable modules. And yes, that's the only way I can make the 'PIE' flag out of the modules while keeping the UML kernel itself works, and the 'scripts/Makefile.lib' I tought has placed those flags correctly. What about adding a 'static' flag to the 'arch/um/Makefile' explicitly, --- KBUILD_RUSTFLAGS_KERNEL += -Crelocation-model=pie KBUILD_RUSTFLAGS_MODULE += -Crelocation-model=static --- but that's just a redundant of the already defined 'KBUILD_RUSTFLAGS'. Have no more ideas what can this flag goes wrong :(
