[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0907311739040.2539@vinegar-pot.mit.edu>
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:02:07 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Tim Abbott <tabbott@...lice.com>
To:	Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>
cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
	Anders Kaseorg <andersk@...lice.com>,
	Nelson Elhage <nelhage@...lice.com>,
	linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] alpha: use .data.init_task instead of
 .data.init_thread.
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 07/31/2009 01:56 PM, Tim Abbott wrote:
> > -	/* Note 2 page alignment above.  */
> > -	.data.init_thread : {
> > -		*(.data.init_thread)
> > -	}
> 
> NACK.
> 
> You can change the section name, sure, but you cannot remove the 2 page
> alignment that we had via the alignment at the end of the init sections.
> You'll break current_thread_info which is always computed as
> (kernel-stack-pointer & -(2*PAGE_SIZE)).
The INIT_TASK_DATA(THREAD_SIZE) macro call aligns to THREAD_SIZE (= 
2*PAGE_SIZE).  So I'm not removing the 2 page alignment; I'm just moving 
it along with the code that needs to be aligned.
This change:
-	. = ALIGN(2 * PAGE_SIZE);
+	. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
 	__init_end = .;
removes the now-unnecessary (2 * PAGE_SIZE) alignment for __init_end 
caused by moving .data.init_task (it should have been in the first patch).
	-Tim Abbott
--
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
 
