Neil Horman writes: > Before anyone flames me for what a oddball solution this is, let me just > say I'm trying to get the ball rolling here. I think there may be better > solutions that can be impemented in reloc_64.S, but I've yet to make any of the > ones I've tried work successfully. I'm open to suggestions, but this solution > is the only one so far that I've been able to get to work. thanks :)
I had thought that the CRCs would be the only things with reloc addends less than 4G, but it turns out that the toolchain folds expressions like __pa(&sym) into just a load from a doubleword (in the TOC) containing the physical address of sym. That needs to be relocated and its reloc addend will be less than 4GB. Hence the crashes early in boot that you were seeing with my proposed patch to reloc_64.S. Given that, your solution seems as reasonable as any. Should this go via the modules maintainer, Rusty Russell, perhaps? In any case, Acked-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus at samba.org> I'm not 100% sure, it does kind of split the middle in regards to what tree is should come through. Rusy, given the previous entries in this thread, do you have any thoughts on the patch, or which tree it should go through? I kind of think that the ppc tree is just fine here since its currently the only user of this code, but I'll defer to other opinions on the subject. Thanks & Regards Neil _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
