Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: update for .39

[David Daney]

On 03/10/2011 10:53 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 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.

If the linker put in gratuitous holes, things like  __ex_table would 
break too.


David Daney
--
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/