On 05.21 Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 01:07:50PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
> > does cause a section conflict, egcs 1.1.2.
> >
> > Interestingly enough, if var[12] are together, without the intervening
> > text, then gcc does not flag an error, instead it puts both variables
Richard Henderson wrote:
> No, the problem is not with which section, but what flags that
> section should have. If you put only "const" data in a section,
> then the section should have SHF_WRITE clear. Conversely, if
> you put writable data in a section then SHF_WRITE should be set.
>
> Now,
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 01:07:50PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
> does cause a section conflict, egcs 1.1.2.
>
> Interestingly enough, if var[12] are together, without the intervening
> text, then gcc does not flag an error, instead it puts both variables
> in section .data.init and marks it as read
On Sun, 20 May 2001 17:34:48 -0400,
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>(let me know if the following test is flawed)
>
> [jgarzik@rum tmp]$ cat > sectest.c
> #include
> #include
> static const char version[] __initdata = "foo";
> [jgarzik@rum tmp]$ gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/spare/cvs/linux_2_4/i
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 12:19:49AM +0200, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> AFAIK "const" is only a promise to the compiler, that we write
> this data ONCE and read only after this initial write. So the
> decision on the section is implementation defined.
No, the problem is not with which section, but what fla
On Sun, 20 May 2001 22:16:11 +0200,
Franz Sirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yes, and gcc3 errors on these constructs, cause it cannot decide if the data
>should be put into a .data or .rodata section.
>Dunno if it's worth to create a __initconstdata/__initrodata though, but it
>would be easy im
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 05:34:48PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> This might be a very valid point...
>
> (let me know if the following test is flawed)
It is imho.
> > [jgarzik@rum tmp]$ cat > sectest.c
> > #include
> > #include
> > static const char version[] __initdata = "foo";
static cha
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 09:51:04PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Appendix: here's the list of affected source files:
>
> arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
Thanks for pointing it out.
--
Russell King ([EMAIL PROTECTED])The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.o
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> On Sun, 20 May 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > Since a while include/linux/init.h contains the line
> > >
> > > * Also note, that this data cannot be "const".
> > >
> > > Why is this? Because const data will be put in a different sect
On Sun, 20 May 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Since a while include/linux/init.h contains the line
> >
> > * Also note, that this data cannot be "const".
> >
> > Why is this? Because const data will be put in a different section?
>
> Causes a "section type conflict
On Sunday 20 May 2001 21:51, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Since a while include/linux/init.h contains the line
>
> * Also note, that this data cannot be "const".
>
> Why is this? Because const data will be put in a different section?
Yes, and gcc3 errors on these constructs, cause it cannot d
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> Since a while include/linux/init.h contains the line
>
> * Also note, that this data cannot be "const".
>
> Why is this? Because const data will be put in a different section?
Causes a "section type conflict" build error, at least on x86.
> FWIW, many source
Since a while include/linux/init.h contains the line
* Also note, that this data cannot be "const".
Why is this? Because const data will be put in a different section?
However, quite some code defines const __init variables (see list below).
So what should be done now?
1. Re
13 matches
Mail list logo
