lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] blackfin: Cleanup linker script using new linker script macros.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:29, Tim Abbott wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 16:26, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:58:01AM -0400, Tim Abbott wrote:
> >> >> OK.  I guess we should plan to modify the INIT_DATA_SECTION macro to add
> >> >> another argument specifying an alignment level for .init.ramfs.  It'd be
> >> >> inconvenient to add that right now since there are a lot of patches in
> >> >> linux-next or otherwise in flight that introduce uses of
> >> >> INIT_DATA_SECTION, and those patches would all be broken by changing this
> >> >> now.  Once the dust settles on that for this release, I'll submit a patch
> >> >> adding said argument to INIT_DATA_SECTION.
> >> >
> >> > But this is all discarded during runtime so the added alignment has no cost in the end - no?
> >>
> >> once things are booted, there should be no difference.  but
> >> storage/boot costs increase (you have to store/extract/copy that extra
> >> data).  you know how miserly we embedded people like to be ;).
> >
> > OK, so how do you want to do this?  The options I see are:
> > (1) we merge this patch now, and add the new alignment argument for -rc2
> > (2) we add the alignment argument sometime after -rc1 and then merge this
> > for -rc2
>
> doing it in two steps is OK by me and sounds like it'd be easier for you

Both options involve two steps -- but as (1) is obviously easier for me, I
assume that's what you were referring to. Thanks.

So are you going to send this to Linus? I'd be happy to do so, but I'd
need your ack.

-Tim Abbott
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-22 17:45    [W:0.059 / U:0.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site