[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1299783236.15854.405.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:53:56 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
peterz@...radead.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de, andi@...stfloor.org, roland@...hat.com,
rth@...hat.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, avi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net,
sam@...nborg.org, michael@...erman.id.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: update for .39
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 10:47 -0800, David Daney wrote:
> The alignment requested by the assembler will have to satisfy *all* the
> requested alignments, so manually forcing everything to .align 8 (or
> .align 4 for 32-bit) should ensure that the linker doesn't put in any holes.
I would agree with the assessment although, I don't know that it is
documented anywhere that this is what happens. As the previous "bug"
with the trace_events was solved by me adding .align(4) everywhere, I
would think that .align(sizeof(long)) would work here too.
It may be a good ideal to force this alignment, and not add wasted
space. If anything, if this (hypothetical) bug appears, it will most
likely show up as a crash on boot up. I'm not too concerned about it.
-- Steve
--
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