On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 23:48:36 +0200
"Alon Bar-Lev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/9/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If we really do have a problem here it'd be better to fix it in some
> > central and global fashion: either by ensuring that each architecture's
> > startup code wi
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 18:37:34 +0100 (CET)
Roman Zippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Heiko Carstens wrote:
>
> > And indeed all the __initdata annotated local and global variables on
> > s390 are in the init.data section. So I'm wondering what this patch
> > series is ab
On 2/9/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If we really do have a problem here it'd be better to fix it in some
central and global fashion: either by ensuring that each architecture's
startup code will zero this memory or by some compiler/linker option such
as -fno-common.
Great,
But w
Hi,
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> And indeed all the __initdata annotated local and global variables on
> s390 are in the init.data section. So I'm wondering what this patch
> series is about. Or I must have missed something.
I think it reaches back to times when gcc 2.7.* was stil
On Friday 09 February 2007, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> And the top-level Makefile has:
>
> CFLAGS := -Wall -Wundef -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs \
>-fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common
>
> Note the -fno-common.
>
> And indeed all the __initdata annotated local and glob
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 05:11:32PM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>
> Follow-up Russell King comment at http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/22/267
>
> All __initdata variables should be initialized so they won't end up
> in BSS.
>
> There is no dependency between patches or even hunks.
>
> Some architect
6 matches
Mail list logo
