The purpose of this patch is to make kernel buildable
with "gcc -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections".
This patch fixes v850 architecture.
Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]>
--
vda
--- 0.org/arch/v850/kernel/init_task.c Wed Jul 2 00:40:42 2008
+++ 1.fixname/arch/v850/kernel/init_task.c Wed Jul 2 00:45:57 2008
@@ -44,5 +44,5 @@
* "init_task" linker map entry.
*/
union thread_union init_thread_union
- __attribute__((__section__(".data.init_task"))) =
+ __attribute__((__section__(".init_task.data"))) =
{ INIT_THREAD_INFO(init_task) };
--- 0.org/arch/v850/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S Wed Jul 2 00:40:42 2008
+++ 1.fixname/arch/v850/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S Wed Jul 2 00:46:26 2008
@@ -95,8 +95,8 @@
TEXT_TEXT \
SCHED_TEXT \
*(.exit.text) /* 2.5 convention */ \
- *(.text.exit) /* 2.4 convention */ \
- *(.text.lock) \
+ *(.exit.text) /* 2.4 convention */ \
+ *(.lock.text) \
*(.exitcall.exit) \
__real_etext = . ; /* There may be data after here. */ \
RODATA_CONTENTS \
@@ -115,11 +115,11 @@
__sdata = . ; \
DATA_DATA \
EXIT_DATA /* 2.5 convention */ \
- *(.data.exit) /* 2.4 convention */ \
+ *(.exit.data) /* 2.4 convention */ \
. = ALIGN (16) ; \
- *(.data.cacheline_aligned) \
+ *(.cacheline_aligned.data) \
. = ALIGN (0x2000) ; \
- *(.data.init_task) \
+ *(.init_task.data) \
. = ALIGN (0x2000) ; \
__edata = . ;
@@ -160,8 +160,8 @@
INIT_TEXT /* 2.5 convention */ \
__einittext = .; \
INIT_DATA \
- *(.text.init) /* 2.4 convention */ \
- *(.data.init) \
+ *(.init.text) /* 2.4 convention */ \
+ *(.init.data) \
INITCALL_CONTENTS \
INITRAMFS_CONTENTS
@@ -171,7 +171,7 @@
. = ALIGN (4096) ; \
__init_start = . ; \
INIT_DATA /* 2.5 convention */ \
- *(.data.init) /* 2.4 convention */ \
+ *(.init.data) /* 2.4 convention */ \
__init_end = . ; \
. = ALIGN (4096) ;
@@ -181,7 +181,7 @@
_sinittext = .; \
INIT_TEXT /* 2.5 convention */ \
_einittext = .; \
- *(.text.init) /* 2.4 convention */ \
+ *(.init.text) /* 2.4 convention */ \
INITCALL_CONTENTS \
INITRAMFS_CONTENTS
On Wednesday 02 July 2008, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> This patch fixes v850 architecture.
For all I know, v850 has been broken and unmaintained for a few years now,
didn't someone have a patch to remove it entirely?
Arnd <><
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 23:45:38 +0200
Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 July 2008, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > This patch fixes v850 architecture.
>
> For all I know, v850 has been broken and unmaintained for a few years now,
> didn't someone have a patch to remove it entirely?
>
yup, it's queued for 2.6.27-rc1.
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 23:45:38 +0200
> Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 02 July 2008, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>>> This patch fixes v850 architecture.
>> For all I know, v850 has been broken and unmaintained for a few years now,
>> didn't someone have a patch to remove it entirely?
>>
>
> yup, it's queued for 2.6.27-rc1.
Same seems to be true for cris btw.
-Andi
On Thursday 03 July 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Same seems to be true for cris btw.
Cris has seen significant updates in 2.6.25 by its maintainer.
It's not a very active port, but skipping updates for one kernel
version is on a completely different scale from doing nothing
at all for over three years as in the v850 case.
I don't currently see any architecture (other than v850) in a
state that justifies removing it entirely.
Arnd <><
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 00:17:52 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 03 July 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Same seems to be true for cris btw.
>
> Cris has seen significant updates in 2.6.25 by its maintainer.
> It's not a very active port, but skipping updates for one kernel
> version is on a completely different scale from doing nothing
> at all for over three years as in the v850 case.
Also, cris has a tree in linux-next now, so there will be updates in 2.6.27.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 03 July 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Same seems to be true for cris btw.
>
> Cris has seen significant updates in 2.6.25 by its maintainer.
Hmm missed that, sorry. It was just last time I looked cris
didn't seem to have any updates for a long time.
> It's not a very active port, but skipping updates for one kernel
> version
It was far longer than that.
-Andi