On Wednesday 05 September 2007 21:07, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 02:47:00PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 14:43, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > > These patches fix section names and add > > > CONFIG_DISCARD_UNUSED_SECTIONS. It is not enabled > > > unconditionally because only newest binutils have > > > ld --gc-sections which is stable enough for kernel use. > > > IOW: this is an experimental feature for now. > > > > Part 1: fix section names over entire source (all arches). > > > > Patch is big and boring global s/.text.lock/.text_lock/ > > type thing. > > The normal naming scheme seems to be: > .<usage>.text so in your example it would be: .lock.text > See the naming of init and exit sections (that was renamed > during 2.5 to be compatible with -ffunction-sections).
Well, there seems to be a problem at least with .bss: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5006 With __attribute__((section(".bss.page_aligned"))) gcc will produce .bss.page_aligned section with NOBITS attribute, purely on the basis of section name starting by '.bss.' With __attribute__((section(".bss_page_aligned"))), section will get PROGBITS attribute instead. Combining NOBITS and PROGBITS sections into one .bss section is not funny. IOW: at least for bss, we _must_ use ".bss.xxx" names. I propose (and will implement in next round of patches) .bss.k.page_aligned ('k' for 'kernel'). Lickily, we alctually have only one special bss section on kernel today. Sam, my question - should I also do the same for text/rodata/data, just for paranoid reasons? -- vda - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
