>>> On 25.09.17 at 15:40, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: > --- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile > +++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ $(addsuffix .c,$(SIMD)) $(addsuffix -avx.c,$(filter > sse%,$(SIMD))): > ln -sf simd.c $@ > > $(TARGET): x86_emulate.o test_x86_emulator.o > - $(HOSTCC) -o $@ $^ > + $(HOSTCC) $(HOSTCFLAGS) -o $@ $^ > > .PHONY: clean > clean: > @@ -98,7 +98,9 @@ asm: > > asm/%: asm ; > > -HOSTCFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_xeninclude) -I. > +HOSTCFLAGS-x86_64 := > +$(call cc-option-add,HOSTCFLAGS-x86_64,HOSTCC,-no-pie) > +HOSTCFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_xeninclude) -I. $(HOSTCFLAGS-$(XEN_COMPILE_ARCH))
Hmm, so other than one could imply from gcc doc we get away without using -fno-PIE at all, i.e. it's only an issue with how linking is being done? Wouldn't it be better then to pass both (as long as supported, if we really care about older compilers here)? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
