[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0806201148430.16227@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
cc: Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [crash, bisected] Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86_64: Fold pda into per cpu
area
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > The loader setup for the percpu section changes with zero basing. Maybe that
> > has bad side effects
>
> How does it work? The symbols in the percpu segment are 0-based, but where
> does the data for the sections which correspond to that segment go?
Its loaded at __per_cpu_load but the symbols have addresses starting at 0.
> So the question is what kernel virtual address is it being loaded to?
> __per_cpu_load is ffffffff808d1000, so ffffffff808d6000 is what you'd
> expect...
Correct.
> Hm, but what happens when this gets converted to bzImage? Hm, looks OK, I
> think.
>
> BTW, I think __per_cpu_load will cause trouble if you make a relocatable
> kernel, being an absolute symbol. But I have relocation off at the moment.
Hmmm.... we could add the relocation offset to __per_cpu_load?
__per_cpu_load is used very sparingly. Basically only useful during early
boot and when a new per cpu area has to be setup. In that case we want to
copy from __per_cpu_load to the newly allocated percpu area.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists