Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build with older binutils and consolidate linker script

From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Mon Aug 24 2009 - 03:14:26 EST


On 08/23/2009 11:55 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> 21.08.09 22:23 >>>
>> On 08/18/2009 08:51 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>
>>> #define VSYSCALL_ADDR (-10*1024*1024)
>>> -#define VSYSCALL_PHYS_ADDR ((LOADADDR(.data.read_mostly) + \
>>> - SIZEOF(.data.read_mostly) + 4095) & ~(4095))
>>> -#define VSYSCALL_VIRT_ADDR ((ADDR(.data.read_mostly) + \
>>> - SIZEOF(.data.read_mostly) + 4095) & ~(4095))
>>> +#define VSYSCALL_PHYS_ADDR ((LOADADDR(.data) + SIZEOF(.data) + \
>>> + PAGE_SIZE - 1) & ~(PAGE_SIZE - 1))
>>> +#define VSYSCALL_VIRT_ADDR ((ADDR(.data) + SIZEOF(.data) + \
>>> + PAGE_SIZE - 1) & ~(PAGE_SIZE - 1))
>>>
>> I'm missing something with this chunk... could you please explain?
>
> There are two changes here: One is the adjustment to properly use the
> new preceding section's name, and the other is to replace the hard coded
> 4095 by PAGE_SIZE-1.
>

Hm. I'm wondering if an actual (NOLOAD)/@nobits section wouldn't be
better...

-hpa

--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/