Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932733AbYBHIOR (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:14:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754315AbYBHIOD (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:14:03 -0500 Received: from public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com ([195.33.99.129]:47992 "EHLO public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753963AbYBHIOB convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 03:14:01 -0500 Message-Id: <47AC1D63.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.2 HP Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 08:14:11 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Sam Ravnborg" , "Chuck Ebbert" Cc: , "Al Viro" Subject: Re: section breakage on ppc64 (aka __devinitconst is broken by design) References: <20080203130844.GS27894@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <47AB4F0E.3050907@redhat.com> <20080207185409.GA21145@uranus.ravnborg.org> In-Reply-To: <20080207185409.GA21145@uranus.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1391 Lines: 33 >I cannot see any other way out of this than to loose all the newly added >consts. We have to different behavior across platforms to find a suitable >solution that is reliable. > >[Kept rest of mail as I added Jan - hope he have some ideas to throw in]. I'd first of all need a better understanding of what these comments are really based upon: /* On some platforms relocations to global data cannot go into read-only sections, so 'const' makes no sense and even causes compile failures with some compilers. */ While I can see such behavior as reasonable for, say, shared objects, I severely doubt that this is generally appropriate for executables, not to say for the kernel. This is particularly in the light of this comment in gcc/output.h: /* To optimize loading of shared programs, define following subsections of data section: which clearly says that the resulting (default) object placement (of read- only data in writeable sections) is an optimization, not a requirement, and even then only for shared programs (which the kernel clearly isn't). Has there been any communication with the gcc folks on this subject? Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/