Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Sep 2002 18:06:19 +1000 | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Important per-cpu fix. |
| |
On 3 Sep 2002 21:52:45 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> Followup to: <20020904042036.816A62C1B6@lists.samba.org> > By author: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> > In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > > In message <20020903.195455.117344683.davem@redhat.com> you write: > > > From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> > > > Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 12:35:41 +1000 > > > > > > This might explain the wierd per-cpu problem reports from Andrew and > > > Dave, and also that nagging feeling that I'm an idiot... > > > > > > Verifying... no without the explicit initializers the per-cpu stuff > > > still ends up in the BSS with egcs-2.9X, even with your fix applied. > > > > OK. I really hate working around wierd toolchain bugs (I use 2.95.4 > > here and it's fine), and adding an initializer to the macro is ugly. > > gcc puts all uninitialized variables in .bss, and it apparently can't > be overridden. This seems to be a side effect of the way gcc handles > common variables.
Err... no, as I said, it doesn't happen with 2.95.4 or 3.0.4.
Rusty. -- there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too many doers quoting their contemporaries. -- Larry McVoy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |