https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #6 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
FWIW, the following makes the issue go away (tested on 4.9.4)
@@ -6196,7 +6210,9 @@
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=r")
(lo_sum:SI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #9 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
(In reply to Yvan Roux from comment #8)
> On 7 branch the following should fix the issue, but as I mentioned in
> comment #5, maybe TARGET_USE_MOVT is a better place to do the checki
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #13 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
The kernel does not currently use -mword-relocations. We are looking into it as
an alternative to -fpic when building the kernel image as a PIE executable so
we can self-relocate at boot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #16 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #15)
> (In reply to ard.biesheuvel from comment #13)
> > The kernel does not currently use -mword-relocations. We are looking into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81863
--- Comment #19 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #17)
>
> Could you put some instructions in this BZ about how you build and test the
> kernel to get these errors ? I'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ard.biesheuvel at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #48 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #47)
> (In reply to ard.biesheuvel from comment #46)
> > One issue that this causes, which I did not see mentioned anywhere in the
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--- Comment #50 from ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #49)
> (In reply to ard.biesheuvel from comment #48)
> > (In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #47)
> > > (In reply
