[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130408115556.GB3561@yoda.lan>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:55:56 +0200
From: Philip Kranz <philip.kranz@...glemail.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: Philip Kranz <philip.kranz@...glemail.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Sebastian Wankerl <sisewank@....cs.fau.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
i4passt@...ts.informatik.uni-erlangen.de,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add non-zero module sections to sysfs
On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 01:44:45PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Philip Kranz <philip.kranz@...glemail.com> writes:
> > I am not able to produce an object file with duplicate section names
> > using gcc on x86. Even with -ffunction-sections, every section gets a
> > unique name. Is this architecture-specific behaviour of gcc?
>
> Good point. ld -r will collapse them into the same section (since gcc
> produces them they have to have the same section attributes).
>
> You can do it with --unique, but no arch uses that. PARISC has a
> platform-specific toolchain hack which does that for .text sections.
> (Thanks to Alan Modra for that clue...)
So that problem is indeed platform-specific. If it is safe to assume
that kernel modules don't have duplicate section names (except on
PARISC), it would make sense to simply move the check for empty sections
to arch/parisc as you suggested.
James, what do you think about that?
Greetings,
Philip
--
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