Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:07:29 +0100 | From | "Vegard Nossum" <> | Subject | Re: v2.6.28-rc2: x86_32 relocation regression? |
| |
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:30 AM, Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> wrote: > Hi, Vegard, > > On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 05:19 +0800, Vegard Nossum wrote: > [...] >> It looks like everything was offset by 0xe00000: >> >> $ addr2line -e vmlinux c119e613 >> arch/x86/lib/string_32.c:20 > > Because relocation is supported in recent Linux kernel, it is possible > that the run-time address is different with compile-time address. In > most cases, the kernel will be loaded into 0x100000 during boot, so the > kernel run-time address range from 0xc0100000 on. But it seems that your > kernel compile-time address range from 0xc0f00000 on. Please check > CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START in your .config. In most cases, it will be set to > 0x100000, so that it is same as run-time address in most cases.
Thanks!
It seems to be caused by this commit:
commit 5cb04df8d3f03e37a19f2502591a84156be71772 Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Date: Sun May 4 19:49:04 2008 +0200
x86: defconfig updates
-CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x100000 -# CONFIG_RELOCATABLE is not set -CONFIG_PHYSICAL_ALIGN=0x100000 ... +CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x1000000 +CONFIG_RELOCATABLE=y +CONFIG_PHYSICAL_ALIGN=0x200000
Were all changes intentional?
Vegard
-- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
| |