[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMzpN2hddTQkHvOYh_Q-4oO3yvZ25LA0N0rBdS2oqn8poiZn9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 18:48:27 -0400
From: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
To: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Fangrui Song <maskray@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Golovin <dima@...ovin.in>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86/boot: Add .text.startup to setup.ld
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 5:32 PM Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> gcc puts the main function into .text.startup when compiled with -Os (or
> -O2). This results in arch/x86/boot/main.c having a .text.startup
> section which is currently not included explicitly in the linker script
> setup.ld in the same directory.
If the compiler is making assumptions based on the function name
"main" wouldn't it be simpler just to rename the function?
--
Brian Gerst
Powered by blists - more mailing lists