lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86: fix build with older binutils and consolidate linker script
    >>> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> 24.08.09 09:13 >>>
    >On 08/23/2009 11:55 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
    >>>>> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> 21.08.09 22:23 >>>
    >>> On 08/18/2009 08:51 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> #define VSYSCALL_ADDR (-10*1024*1024)
    >>>> -#define VSYSCALL_PHYS_ADDR ((LOADADDR(.data.read_mostly) + \
    >>>> - SIZEOF(.data.read_mostly) + 4095) & ~(4095))
    >>>> -#define VSYSCALL_VIRT_ADDR ((ADDR(.data.read_mostly) + \
    >>>> - SIZEOF(.data.read_mostly) + 4095) & ~(4095))
    >>>> +#define VSYSCALL_PHYS_ADDR ((LOADADDR(.data) + SIZEOF(.data) + \
    >>>> + PAGE_SIZE - 1) & ~(PAGE_SIZE - 1))
    >>>> +#define VSYSCALL_VIRT_ADDR ((ADDR(.data) + SIZEOF(.data) + \
    >>>> + PAGE_SIZE - 1) & ~(PAGE_SIZE - 1))
    >>>>
    >>> I'm missing something with this chunk... could you please explain?
    >>
    >> There are two changes here: One is the adjustment to properly use the
    >> new preceding section's name, and the other is to replace the hard coded
    >> 4095 by PAGE_SIZE-1.
    >>
    >
    >Hm. I'm wondering if an actual (NOLOAD)/@nobits section wouldn't be
    >better...

    For what? The immediately preceding section?

    In any case, it would seem that this would be an independent patch on top
    of mine...

    Jan



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-08-24 09:23    [W:0.022 / U:212.152 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site