2007-02-09 02:57:52

by Parag Warudkar

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

>x86-fix-vdso-mapping-for-aout-executables.patch
>a.out executables are presently non-functional. This patch needs more work.

I have a patch for x86 ready and tested and I should be able to get
the full thing (x86, ppc, sh and x86_64) out over the weekend. (This
time around I got rid of the CONFIG stuff used __attribute__((weak))
as Andi suggested. Hopefully that's what you meant by more work?)

Parag


2007-02-09 03:05:06

by Andrew Morton

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 21:57:50 -0500 "Parag Warudkar" <[email protected]> wrote:

> >x86-fix-vdso-mapping-for-aout-executables.patch
> >a.out executables are presently non-functional. This patch needs more work.
>
> I have a patch for x86 ready and tested and I should be able to get
> the full thing (x86, ppc, sh and x86_64) out over the weekend. (This
> time around I got rid of the CONFIG stuff used __attribute__((weak))
> as Andi suggested. Hopefully that's what you meant by more work?)
>

Sounds good, thanks.

2007-02-10 17:04:56

by Robert Hancock

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
>> How about this one instead then:
> Well, the warning you get is not that obvious:
>
> test.c: In function 'main':
> test.c:11: warning: 'deprecated_irqf' is deprecated
>
> And as far as I could test (gcc 4.1.1 and gcc 3.4.3), Arjan's comment is
> not true, the "static const int" don't use extra space, they get
> optimized away by the compiler (see http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/9/106).

gcc 3.2 should be tested as well, that is still supported by the kernel,
and versions before 3.4 did not have unit-at-a-time optimizations.

--
Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from [email protected]
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/

2007-02-12 21:21:03

by Frederik Deweerdt

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 11:04:48AM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
> >>How about this one instead then:
> >Well, the warning you get is not that obvious:
> >test.c: In function 'main':
> >test.c:11: warning: 'deprecated_irqf' is deprecated
> >And as far as I could test
... which apparently was not enough :)
> >(gcc 4.1.1 and gcc 3.4.3), Arjan's comment is
> >not true, the "static const int" don't use extra space, they get
> >optimized away by the compiler (see http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/9/106).
>
> gcc 3.2 should be tested as well, that is still supported by the kernel, and versions before 3.4 did not have unit-at-a-time optimizations.
Sorry for the delay. I've setup a 3.2.3 gcc and, indeed, the symbols
make their way in the binary...

$ gcc-3.2.3 -O2 -c dont_use_flag.c
$ nm dont_use_flag.o
00000000 r SA_INTERRUPT
00000000 T main
U printf

Regards,
Frederik