Re: [PATCH] module: set .init_array alignment to 8

[Jessica Yu]

+++ David Daney [07/03/17 17:31 -0800]:
> The proper idiom for aligning linker sections in modules is different
> than for built-in sections.  ". = ALIGN();" followed by a forced
> output address of 0 does nothing, as forcing the address changes the
> value of ".".
>
> Use output section alignment specifier instead.
>
> Fixes: 9ddf82521c86 ("kernel: add support for .init_array.* constructors")
> Signed-off-by: David Daney <david.daney@xxxxxxxxxx>

Good catch, thanks. I've applied this to modules-next.

Jessica

> I noticed this when doing the __jump_table thing.  Doesn't seem to
> break a defconfig build, but otherwise untested.
>
> scripts/module-common.lds | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/module-common.lds b/scripts/module-common.lds
> index 9b6e246..d61b9e8 100644
> --- a/scripts/module-common.lds
> +++ b/scripts/module-common.lds
> @@ -20,8 +20,7 @@ SECTIONS {
> 	__kcrctab_unused_gpl	0 : { *(SORT(___kcrctab_unused_gpl+*)) }
> 	__kcrctab_gpl_future	0 : { *(SORT(___kcrctab_gpl_future+*)) }
>
> -	. = ALIGN(8);
> -	.init_array		0 : { *(SORT(.init_array.*)) *(.init_array) }
> +	.init_array		0 : ALIGN(8) { *(SORT(.init_array.*)) *(.init_array) }
>
> 	__jump_table		0 : ALIGN(8) { KEEP(*(__jump_table)) }
> }
> --
> 2.9.3