lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: is there a limit on bss size?
On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 12:32:35PM +0300, Petko Manolov wrote:
> It is not so difficult as it looks.

I don't see it being difficult at all ...

> The master pgd looking as:
>
> .org 0x1000
> ENTRY(swapper_pg_dir)
> .long 0x00102007
> .long 0x00103007
> .fill BOOT_USER_PGD_PTRS-2,4,0
> /* default: 766 entries */
> .long 0x00102007
> .long 0x00103007
> /* default: 254 entries */
> .fill BOOT_KERNEL_PGD_PTRS-2,4,0
>
>
> should become:
>
>
> .org 0x1000
> ENTRY(swapper_pg_dir)
> .long 0x00102007
> .long 0x00103007
> .... # every entry addresses 4 MB exactly
> .... # so add as much as you want
> .long 0x0010X007
> .fill BOOT_USER_PGD_PTRS-X+2,4,0

I'm unconvinced we need to map more than 4 MB into low virtual addresses;
nothing seems to break with

ENTRY(swapper_pg_dir)
.long 0x00102007
.fill BOOT_USER_PGD_PTRS-1,4,0

here and I don't see anything that would break unless we moved head.S ...

> But i honestly don't see the point of all that.

Arbitrary kernel size limits are bad. Not complaining about a kernel
that definitely won't boot while building is even worse, and I think
the latter is actually pretty easy to fix ...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:39    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans