On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 09:35:03AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> Did you try the patch I posted?
/me reads other email. I see you did. Applying.
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lis
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:27:26AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> binutils-2.19 _end is what we expect
> binutils-2.19.1 _end is what we expect
> binutils-2.19.50.0.1 _end is what we expect
> binutils-2.19.51.0.1 _end is 1000
>
> From the release notes:
>
> binutils-2.19.50.
On Jul 9, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
Hmm, having said all that, the following linker patch seems reasonable
to me and probably won't break anything else (always some risk).
Please test it for me.
Index: ld/ldlang.c
===
R
On Jul 10, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Jul 9, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:31:53PM -0500, Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797
wrote:
I understand your arguments, but there is something inconsistent
about this.
If I change the script to be:
_end3 = .
On Jul 9, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:31:53PM -0500, Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797
wrote:
I understand your arguments, but there is something inconsistent
about this.
If I change the script to be:
_end3 = . ;
. = _end3;
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:31:53PM -0500, Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797 wrote:
> I understand your arguments, but there is something inconsistent about this.
> If I change the script to be:
>_end3 = . ;
>. = _end3;
>. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
>_end = . ;
>PROVIDE32 (end
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:31:53PM -0500, Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797 wrote:
> Kumar Gala wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:40 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:52:59PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
To further verify this if I switch the -me500 to -mspe and build things
seem
Kumar Gala wrote:
On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:40 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:52:59PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
To further verify this if I switch the -me500 to -mspe and build things
seem to be ok. This further points at some APU section related bug.
Like omitting .PPC.EMB.ap
On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:40 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:52:59PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
To further verify this if I switch the -me500 to -mspe and build
things
seem to be ok. This further points at some APU section related bug.
Like omitting .PPC.EMB.apuinfo from your k
On Jul 8, 2009, at 10:39 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Jul 8, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 05:41:39PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
If we modify the linker script:
_end2 = .;
_end3 = ALIGN(4096);
_end4 = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
_end
On Jul 8, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 05:41:39PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
If we modify the linker script:
_end2 = .;
_end3 = ALIGN(4096);
_end4 = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
_end = . ;
PROVIDE32 (end = .);
and the resu
On Jul 8, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 05:41:39PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
If we modify the linker script:
_end2 = .;
_end3 = ALIGN(4096);
_end4 = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
_end = . ;
PROVIDE32 (end = .);
and the resu
Alan,
We are seeing an issue w/ld and kernel linking of 32-bit kernels.
The ld from fedora 11 (2.19.51.0.2-17.fc11 20090204) ends not
providing the proper address for _end.
Building stock v2.6.30 w/the mpc85xx_defconfig we get:
1000 A _end
Using 2.18.50.20080215 we get:
c068 A _en
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:52:59PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> To further verify this if I switch the -me500 to -mspe and build things
> seem to be ok. This further points at some APU section related bug.
Like omitting .PPC.EMB.apuinfo from your kernel link script? See the
ld info doc on orphan
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 05:41:39PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> If we modify the linker script:
>
> _end2 = .;
> _end3 = ALIGN(4096);
> _end4 = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
> . = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
> _end = . ;
> PROVIDE32 (end = .);
>
> and the result is:
>
> 1000 A _end
15 matches
Mail list logo