[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49FDF282.7010207@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 21:37:38 +0200
From: Helge Deller <deller@....de>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
CC: Tim Abbott <tabbott@....EDU>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Anders Kaseorg <andersk@....edu>,
Waseem Daher <wdaher@....edu>,
Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
Jeff Arnold <jbarnold@....edu>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] parisc: use new macros for .data.init_task.
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 07:13:37AM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>> Tim Abbott wrote:
>>> .data.init_task should not need a separate output section; this change
>>> moves it into the .data section.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Abbott <tabbott@....edu>
>>> Cc: Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>
>>> Cc: Helge Deller <deller@....de>
>>> Cc: linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org
>>
>> I think this patch is wrong, although it is theoretically correct.
>>
>> IIRC, gcc on hppa is not able to provide an alignment >= 8k, which is
>> why we have done the 16k alignment inside the linker script.
>> So, I think this change will prevent the parisc kernel to boot up.
>> Needs testing.
>
> The patch does not do much...
>
>> Helge
>>
>>> ---
>>> arch/parisc/kernel/init_task.c | 2 +-
>>> arch/parisc/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S | 10 ++--------
>>> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/init_task.c b/arch/parisc/kernel/init_task.c
>>> index 1e25a45..8ee17ea 100644
>>> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/init_task.c
>>> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/init_task.c
>>> @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(init_mm);
>>> * "init_task" linker map entry..
>>> */
>>> union thread_union init_thread_union
>>> - __attribute__((aligned(128))) __attribute__((__section__(".data.init_task"))) =
>>> + __attribute__((aligned(128))) __init_task_data =
>>> { INIT_THREAD_INFO(init_task) };
> This is a simple replacement with a nicer way to say "this belongs to
> the .data.init_task section - no functional difference.
>
>
>>>
>>> #if PT_NLEVELS == 3
>>> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S b/arch/parisc/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
>>> index b5936c9..c8a528d 100644
>>> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
>>> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
>>> @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ SECTIONS
>>> . = ALIGN(L1_CACHE_BYTES);
>>> /* Data */
>>> .data : {
>>> + /* assembler code expects init_task to be 16k aligned */
>>> + INIT_TASK_DATA(16384)
>>> NOSAVE_DATA
>>> CACHELINE_ALIGNED_DATA(L1_CACHE_BYTES)
>>> DATA_DATA
>>> @@ -133,14 +135,6 @@ SECTIONS
>>> }
>>> __bss_stop = .;
>>>
>>> -
>>> - /* assembler code expects init_task to be 16k aligned */
>>> - . = ALIGN(16384);
>>> - /* init_task */
>>> - .data.init_task : {
>>> - *(.data.init_task)
>>> - }
>>> -
> This part moves away from a specific output section to including this in the
> .data output section - with the _same_ alignmnet.
> So the only issue here is that we move init_task before NOSAVE_DATA etc.
>
> I do not see why you think this changes alignmnet?
Ugh. Of course you are correct. It doesn't change anything.
Patch is OK for me.
I missed the 16384 in INIT_TASK_DATA(16384).
Thanks,
Helge
--
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