Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756960AbZCJVZn (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:25:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755582AbZCJVZc (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:25:32 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:59761 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755661AbZCJVZa (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:25:30 -0400 To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Sam Ravnborg , Yinghai Lu , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Ingo Molnar , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <49B5AD6A.2020101@goop.org> <49B5C12B.1020108@kernel.org> <20090310053721.GA25977@uranus.ravnborg.org> <49B6CB84.8060404@kernel.org> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:25:18 -0700 In-Reply-To: <49B6CB84.8060404@kernel.org> (H. Peter Anvin's message of "Tue\, 10 Mar 2009 13\:20\:20 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=67.169.126.145;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.169.126.145 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: hpa@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, jeremy@goop.org, yinghai@kernel.org, sam@ravnborg.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;"H. Peter Anvin" X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral Subject: Re: Absolute symbols in vmlinux_64.lds.S X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:26:12 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1170 Lines: 33 "H. Peter Anvin" writes: > Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> I have no complaint with that. I believe the symbols are absolute >> simply because they were originally coded that way and the relocatable >> kernel work on x86_64 didn't need them to change. >> > > I have a vague memory of a bug in the x86-64 ld. Oh. I'm certain of it. ld has all kinds of bugs off and on, occasionally we are bound to run into a few of them. ld bugs isn't the reason for using absolute linker symbols. We use a bunch of relative linker symbols as well. All of the generic linker scripts sections use them as well as a few of the x86_64 specific sections. For crazy things like 0 relative per cpu sections it might matter. For the rest of the symbols absolute or relative simply doesn't matter. Is anyone interested in writing a patch testing it and changing things? If not things should be good enough for now. Eric -- 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/