[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081015180929.GB10600@x200.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:09:29 +0400
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...e.hu, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fastboot: Introduce an asynchronous function call
mechanism
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:55:15AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > > I was actually "?"ing at the "= 0". I thought that would be obvious
> > > but it's whizzed past two people so far :(
> >
> > Is there evidence that some gccs will not add such variable to .bss?
> >
> > Because "= 0;" is more readable.
>
> From: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.3/changes.html
>
> GCC 3.3.1 automatically places zero-initialized variables in the .bss
> section on some operating systems. Versions of GNU Emacs up to (and
> including) 21.3 will not work correctly when using this optimization;
> you can use -fno-zero-initialized-in-bss to disable it.
>
> so presumably gcc 3.2 (which we still support, right?) does not do this
> (and puts such variables in .data).
So we're doing this for one low-end gcc version, nobody except Andi uses
(it must be patched surely).
--
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