>>> On 25.06.19 at 14:48, wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 01:08:49PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> Sorry for not being clear. By remove I mean `git rm
>> xen/arch/x86/efi/relocs-dummy.S` and fix the build, like the diff
>> appended below.
>
> The chunk below will not work because relocs-dummy
>>> On 25.06.19 at 13:08, wrote:
> Sorry for not being clear. By remove I mean `git rm
> xen/arch/x86/efi/relocs-dummy.S` and fix the build, like the diff
> appended below.
>
> Is there any reason we should keep the dummy .reloc in the ELF
> output?
Yes, there is. And yes, I was afraid you'd mea
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 01:08:49PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 03:18:14AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 25.06.19 at 10:10, wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 01:24:02PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> > >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrot
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 03:18:14AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 25.06.19 at 10:10, wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 01:24:02PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> > >>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019
>>> On 25.06.19 at 10:10, wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 01:24:02PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > >>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > >> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 01:24:02PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:02, wrote:
> > >> > If the hypervisor h
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:02, wrote:
> >> > If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
> >> > This allows to p
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 06:07:25AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 21.06.19 at 13:46, wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:
>>> On 21.06.19 at 13:46, wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:02, wrote:
>> >> > If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:34:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:02, wrote:
> >> > If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
> >> > This allows to p
>>> On 19.06.19 at 17:06, wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:02, wrote:
>> > If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
>> > This allows to position the .reloc section correctly in the output
>> > binary, or else
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:57:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 19.06.19 at 13:02, wrote:
> > If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
> > This allows to position the .reloc section correctly in the output
> > binary, or else the linker might place .reloc before th
>>> On 19.06.19 at 16:30, wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:20:40PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> Since the MB1/MB2 builds aren't relocatable, I think we might be able to
>> get away with simply excluding them in the non-EFI build.
>
> Hm, OK. I'm slightly loss then. I've taken a look at the h
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:20:40PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 19/06/2019 12:02, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
>
> Seeing as this continues the sentence from the subject, it should start
> without a capital. Otherwise the resul
>>> On 19.06.19 at 13:02, wrote:
> If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
> This allows to position the .reloc section correctly in the output
> binary, or else the linker might place .reloc before the .text
> section.
>
> Note that the .reloc section is moved before
>>> On 19.06.19 at 13:20, wrote:
> On 19/06/2019 12:02, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>> Note that the .reloc section is moved before .bss for two reasons: in
>> order for the resulting binary to not contain any section with data
>> after .bss, so that the file size can be smaller than the loaded
>> memo
On 19/06/2019 12:02, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
Seeing as this continues the sentence from the subject, it should start
without a capital. Otherwise the result is werd to read.
> This allows to position the .reloc section correctl
If the hypervisor has been built with EFI support (ie: multiboot2).
This allows to position the .reloc section correctly in the output
binary, or else the linker might place .reloc before the .text
section.
Note that the .reloc section is moved before .bss for two reasons: in
order for the resulti
18 matches
Mail list logo
