[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiDSCv5eKGgQ3f6jstoo9X0Je3T63waVrPH3nth4-280+rcdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2023 17:35:06 +0200
From: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>
To: Ross Zwisler <zwisler@...nel.org>
Cc: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Philipp Rudo <prudo@...hat.com>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] x86/purgatory: Add linker script
Hi Ross
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 at 21:14, Ross Zwisler <zwisler@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 3:45 AM Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org> wrote:
> > Make sure that the .text section is not divided in multiple overlapping
> > sections. This is not supported by kexec_file.
>
> How does this interact with patch #1 from this series, which IIUC
> allows us to handle the case where the .text section is split between
> .text and .text.hot? Do we still need that patch, but only for
> non-x86 platforms? Or do we need both, and this patch will need to be
> replicated for other arches?
Patch 1/2 is a must. Patch 2/2 is a nice_to_have and would be great to
have a similar patch for every arch... but I do not feel confident
enough to send it for every arch :)
If we have linker scripts for all the arches do we need 1/2?
I think so, because the user might want to load a kernel <6.4 built
with clang > 16.
Regards!
--
Ricardo Ribalda
Powered by blists - more mailing lists